Re: THE 'TAPE'

[dave weil]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:58:24 +0000, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

>I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>Arnii over the head at every opportunity. I made it because Arnii
>accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way. It rubbed me up
>the wrong way to be accused of doing what he said I had done, and that
>is the only reason why I did what I did. It is not illegal to record
>phone conversations in this country so long as the equipment does not
>connect directly to someone else's phone line.
>
>I gave the recording to George because he asked for it and I trusted
>him. He did ask if he could pass it on to a few trusted friends, and I
>said that would be fine but I wanted to know who they were and not
>have the recording distributed freely. I now have no idea who has the
>recording, and I am EXTREMELY ANGRY this has happened.

You tell 'em Dev!

BTW, I have a copy of it but I'll be happy to delete it if you'd like.
For the record, it was never shared with anyone else, per
instructions. However, I'll have to reserve the right to use the
phrase "Bull****, bull****,bull****" and "dumping garbage on the lawn"
*with* impunity. Sorry, it's part of the RAO lexicon now.

Finally, I took some shots the other night of a singer friend of mine,
and I used 3200 ISO on some fairly low light shots. I'm amazed that
it's almost impossible to tell at web viewing sizes. Obviously, if you
veiw at full size, the noise is definitely strong, but it's still not
all that bad. At 900X600, you just can't tell that it's such a high
ISO, at least in the shots that I took. I'll need to send you one as
an example. I'm guessing that they might make great prints up to about
6X9 without ANY noise reduction.

Now, back to your regular program...

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :


> You tell 'em Dev!
>
> BTW, I have a copy of it but I'll be happy to delete it if you'd like.
> For the record, it was never shared with anyone else, per
> instructions. However, I'll have to reserve the right to use the
> phrase "Bull****, bull****,bull****" and "dumping garbage on the lawn"
> *with* impunity. Sorry, it's part of the RAO lexicon now.

Sorry for him Devil but you should understand.
Dave cannot have a decent erection if he doesn't listen to the "TAPE"
before. :-D

[dave weil]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:35:48 +0000, The Devil > wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:34:03 +0100, Lionel >
>wrote:
>
>>In >, dave weil wrote :
>>
>>
>>> You tell 'em Dev!
>>>
>>> BTW, I have a copy of it but I'll be happy to delete it if you'd like.
>>> For the record, it was never shared with anyone else, per
>>> instructions. However, I'll have to reserve the right to use the
>>> phrase "Bull****, bull****,bull****" and "dumping garbage on the lawn"
>>> *with* impunity. Sorry, it's part of the RAO lexicon now.
>>
>>Sorry for him Devil but you should understand.
>>Dave cannot have a decent erection if he doesn't listen to the "TAPE"
>>before. :-D
>
>Seriously, what is wrong with you?

I dunno. I seem to be territory that he's marked or something.

[[email protected]]

The Devil wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:34:03 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
> >In >, dave weil wrote :
> >
> >
> >> You tell 'em Dev!
> >>
> >> BTW, I have a copy of it but I'll be happy to delete it if you'd
like.
> >> For the record, it was never shared with anyone else, per
> >> instructions. However, I'll have to reserve the right to use the
> >> phrase "Bull****, bull****,bull****" and "dumping garbage on the
lawn"
> >> *with* impunity. Sorry, it's part of the RAO lexicon now.
> >
> >Sorry for him Devil but you should understand.
> >Dave cannot have a decent erection if he doesn't listen to the
"TAPE"
> >before. :-D
>
> Seriously, what is wrong with you?
>
>


Are you ****ing serious? This has got to be the ultimate "pots and
kettles" post. Are you totally lacking in self-awareness, you ****ing
whack-job?

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:35:48 +0000, The Devil > wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:34:03 +0100, Lionel >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In >, dave weil wrote :
>>>
>>>
>>>> You tell 'em Dev!
>>>>
>>>> BTW, I have a copy of it but I'll be happy to delete it if you'd like.
>>>> For the record, it was never shared with anyone else, per
>>>> instructions. However, I'll have to reserve the right to use the
>>>> phrase "Bull****, bull****,bull****" and "dumping garbage on the lawn"
>>>> *with* impunity. Sorry, it's part of the RAO lexicon now.
>>>
>>>Sorry for him Devil but you should understand.
>>>Dave cannot have a decent erection if he doesn't listen to the "TAPE"
>>>before. :-D
>>
>>Seriously, what is wrong with you?


Seriously, I'm really sorry Devil there's nothing wrong with me... I didn't
want to disturb you, please believe me.
But since you have recently written that you have killfiled 95% of RAO
regulars I cannot imagine that you can read that... ;-)


> I dunno. I seem to be territory that he's marked or something.

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :

> I dunno. I seem to be territory that he's marked or something.

Exactly !!!
And do you know how I am marking it ?

....Like a dog. ;-)

[Lionel_Chapuis]

The Devil wrote:


> I gave the recording to George because he asked for it and I trusted
> him.

A little bit childly naive for a "Devil" don't you think so Graham ?




----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[dave weil]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:50:36 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>In >, dave weil wrote :
>
>> I dunno. I seem to be territory that he's marked or something.
>
>Exactly !!!
>And do you know how I am marking it ?
>
>...Like a dog. ;-)

Well, you said it, I didn't. Doesn't bother me any though.

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :


> Well, you said it, I didn't. Doesn't bother me any though.

That I **** on you ?
Note that I do my best. I understand that it's just a light succedaneum
compare to your regretted daily spanking.

[[email protected]]

the career sycophant wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:50:36 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
> >In >, dave weil wrote :
> >
> >> I dunno. I seem to be territory that he's marked or something.
> >
> >Exactly !!!
> >And do you know how I am marking it ?
> >
> >...Like a dog. ;-)
>
> Well, you said it, I didn't. Doesn't bother me any though.
>
>

You do know how dogs mark territory, doncha, dave? Do you like golden
showers?

[MINe 109]

In article >,
dave weil > wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:50:36 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
> >In >, dave weil wrote :
> >
> >> I dunno. I seem to be territory that he's marked or something.
> >
> >Exactly !!!
> >And do you know how I am marking it ?
> >
> >...Like a dog. ;-)
>
> Well, you said it, I didn't. Doesn't bother me any though.

http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3

Stephen

[dave weil]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:05:54 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>In >, dave weil wrote :
>
>
>> Well, you said it, I didn't. Doesn't bother me any though.
>
>That I **** on you ?

Right.

>Note that I do my best. I understand that it's just a light succedaneum
>compare to your regretted daily spanking.

How rococo of you.

BTW, you need to work on your tenses.

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:05:54 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>>In >, dave weil wrote :
>>
>>
>>> Well, you said it, I didn't. Doesn't bother me any though.
>>
>>That I **** on you ?
>
> Right.
>
>>Note that I do my best. I understand that it's just a light succedaneum
>>compare to your regretted daily spanking.
>
> How rococo of you.


Rococo ? Sorry Dave but the Manneken-Pis is in Belgian not French.


> BTW, you need to work on your tenses.


Why should I bother since you understand ?

[Lionel]

In >, MINe 109 wrote :

> http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3

I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
still alive.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:23:08 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>In >, MINe 109 wrote :
>
>> http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
>
>I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
>still alive.

Well, no more angry than *your* wife, who seems to have lost your
evening to RAO.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Graham wrote:


>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:34:03 +0100, Lionel >
>wrote:
>
>>In >, dave weil wrote :
>>
>>
>>> You tell 'em Dev!
>>>
>>> BTW, I have a copy of it but I'll be happy to delete it if you'd like.
>>> For the record, it was never shared with anyone else, per
>>> instructions. However, I'll have to reserve the right to use the
>>> phrase "Bull****, bull****,bull****" and "dumping garbage on the lawn"
>>> *with* impunity. Sorry, it's part of the RAO lexicon now.
>>
>>Sorry for him Devil but you should understand.
>>Dave cannot have a decent erection if he doesn't listen to the "TAPE"
>>before. :-D
>
>Seriously, what is wrong with you?
>

Severe cognitive limitations, many psychiatric problems, and a total lack of
self-awareness. He's also a chronic liar.
>--
>td
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Bruce J. Richman

[Arny Krueger]

"The Devil" > wrote in message
news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz

> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.

So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him. This
is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would capitalize on it
every way he could.

>I made it because Arnii
> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.

This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation - you
can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's only
contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If this
is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did catch
my name, and handed the phone off to me.

Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't happened
yet.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Dave Weil wrote:


>On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:23:08 +0100, Lionel >
>wrote:
>
>>In >, MINe 109 wrote :
>>
>>> http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
>>
>>I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
>>still alive.
>
>Well, no more angry than *your* wife, who seems to have lost your
>evening to RAO.
>
>
>
>
>
>

She probably beats him up regularly because of his obvious inappropriate
behavioor and generral stupidity. Then he comes here and tries to displace his
aggression by smearing as many people as he can.



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Arny Krueger wrote:


>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>
>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>
>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him. This
>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would capitalize on it
>every way he could.
>
>>I made it because Arnii
>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>
>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation - you
>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's only
>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If this
>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did catch
>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>

Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims about Roy's
sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that Roy is at all
inebriated. I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
this assessment.


>Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't happened
>yet.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



Bruce J. Richman

[Arny Krueger]

"The Devil" > wrote in message
news:5q4001l3k99ts3afmofpqr9c9dsgrfrjbr@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:31:31 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

>> "The Devil" > wrote in message
>> news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz

>>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.

>> So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>> him. This is the only way that this statement could be meaningful.
>> In fact Roy gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he
>> would capitalize on it every way he could.

>>> I made it because Arnii
>>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.

>> This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation
>> - you can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>> Roy's only contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>> conversation. If this is the conversation I'm thinking of, my
>> daughter answered the phone, couldn't make heads or tales out of
>> Roy's drunken blathering but did catch my name, and handed the phone
>> off to me.

>> Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't
>> happened yet.


> Oh, and BTW, anyone who has listened to the recording will know that
> what you say is a lie. We talk about the occasion in question when I
> called to apologise for my inexcusable behaviour over Nate--an apology
> you accepted but later rejected.

I rejected it later when your continued public misbehavior showed that you
were not sincere.

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> "The Devil" > wrote in message
> news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>
> > I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
> > this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
> > recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
> > Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>
> So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him.
This
> is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
> gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
capitalize on it
> every way he could.
>
>

I suspect Roy may have discovered that whilst recording a private
telephone conversation sans consent is legal in the UK, distributing
said recording sans consent is not. Hence, this posturing.

>
>
> >I made it because Arnii
> > accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
wanted
> > him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>
> This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation
- you
> can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
only
> contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If
this
> is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
> couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did
catch
> my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>
> Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't
happened
> yet.
>
>


BINGO! Only a drunk (or dope addict) on a binge would attempt a lame
explanation like that.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
The Devil > wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:31:31 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:

> >This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation - you
> >can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's only
> >contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If this
> >is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
> >couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did catch
> >my name, and handed the phone off to me.
> >
> >Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't happened
> >yet.
>
> I think I'm going to cry.

I'd laugh my head off, but that would imply that I know what's on the
recording. OTOH, the first bit's pretty funny all by itself.

Of course, a resourceful man could persuade Christopher Guest and Harry
Shearer to improvise a few minutes of material.

Stephen

[dave weil]

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:50:22 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:
>> This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation
>> - you can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>> Roy's only contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>> conversation. If this is the conversation I'm thinking of, my
>> daughter answered the phone, couldn't make heads or tales out of
>> Roy's drunken blathering but did catch my name, and handed the phone
>> off to me.

Just for the record, the daughter incident happened prior to the
recording, because it's discussed.

Your WIFE answered the phone, not your daughter. and your wife had
trouble getting his name, thinking that he said his name was Roy
England, not Roy from England. So, perhaps your family has problem
with understanding phone voices.

So no, this isn't the conversation that you are thinking of.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
Lionel > wrote:

> In >, MINe 109 wrote :
>
> > http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
>
> I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
> still alive.

He also could have tried pouring the beer on the snow directly.

Ob audio: Wasn't this depicted in Des pas sur la neige by Debussy?

Stephen

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:23:08 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>>In >, MINe 109 wrote
>>:
>>
>>> http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
>>
>>I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
>>still alive.
>
> Well, no more angry than *your* wife, who seems to have lost your
> evening to RAO.

In the evening we have listened together "Fish out of water" by Charles
Lloyd and "Dona Nostra" by Don Cherry.
Interesting program don't you thing so ?


Oh, oh I see... You think that when a guy is married he is *obliged* to ****
"Madam" everyday. This is why you aren't married... LOL.

Dave isn't married because he was scary about the "conjugal tyrannic
exigences".
Don't worry Dave if you don't marry a nymphomaniac you are not obliged to
metamorphose yourself in a Stakhanov of the penis, you are not obliged to
organize a ****fest every evening !!!!

Let me suggest you to stop your fantasies about the simple and daily life
Dave and try to built *your* own real and solid experience.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 01:03:18 +0100, Lionel >
wrote:

>In >, dave weil wrote :
>
>> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:23:08 +0100, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In >, MINe 109 wrote
>>>:
>>>
>>>> http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
>>>
>>>I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
>>>still alive.
>>
>> Well, no more angry than *your* wife, who seems to have lost your
>> evening to RAO.
>
>In the evening we have listened together "Fish out of water" by Charles
>Lloyd and "Dona Nostra" by Don Cherry.
>Interesting program don't you thing so ?

With tracks in between mad dashes to RAO, yes, I think it's an
interesting program all right.

>Oh, oh I see... You think that when a guy is married he is *obliged* to ****
>"Madam" everyday. This is why you aren't married... LOL.
>
>Dave isn't married because he was scary about the "conjugal tyrannic
>exigences".
>Don't worry Dave if you don't marry a nymphomaniac you are not obliged to
>metamorphose yourself in a Stakhanov of the penis, you are not obliged to
>organize a ****fest every evening !!!!
>
>Let me suggest you to stop your fantasies about the simple and daily life
>Dave and try to built *your* own real and solid experience.

Who said anything about ****ing?

[MINe 109]

In article >,
The Devil > wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:56:04 GMT, MINe 109 >
> wrote:
>
> >I'd laugh my head off, but that would imply that I know what's on the
> >recording. OTOH, the first bit's pretty funny all by itself.
> >
> >Of course, a resourceful man could persuade Christopher Guest and Harry
> >Shearer to improvise a few minutes of material.
>
> LOL! I loved A Mighty Wind. For some reason, I kept thinking of you
> when I was watching it! Those album covers, maybe. LOL!!!

Not the musical abuse, choral style? Weeeeelllll.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> The Devil > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:31:31 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>> wrote:
>
>>> This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>> preparation - you can't make the tape after the conversation is
>>> over. However, Roy's only contact with my daughter was at the
>>> beginning at the conversation. If this is the conversation I'm
>>> thinking of, my daughter answered the phone, couldn't make heads or
>>> tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did catch my name, and
>>> handed the phone off to me.
>>>
>>> Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't
>>> happened yet.
>>
>> I think I'm going to cry.
>
> I'd laugh my head off, but that would imply that I know what's on the
> recording. OTOH, the first bit's pretty funny all by itself.

What's funny about it?

[Lionel]

In >, dave weil wrote :

> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 01:03:18 +0100, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>>In >, dave weil wrote :
>>
>>> On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:23:08 +0100, Lionel >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In >, MINe 109
>>>>wrote
>>>>:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
>>>>
>>>>I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
>>>>still alive.
>>>
>>> Well, no more angry than *your* wife, who seems to have lost your
>>> evening to RAO.
>>
>>In the evening we have listened together "Fish out of water" by Charles
>>Lloyd and "Dona Nostra" by Don Cherry.
>>Interesting program don't you thing so ?
>
> With tracks in between mad dashes to RAO, yes, I think it's an
> interesting program all right.

Note that in the meantime I am also "working" with a recalcitrant 3D CAD
software to built my future horn speakers.

>>Oh, oh I see... You think that when a guy is married he is *obliged* to
>>**** "Madam" everyday. This is why you aren't married... LOL.
>>
>>Dave isn't married because he was scary about the "conjugal tyrannic
>>exigences".
>>Don't worry Dave if you don't marry a nymphomaniac you are not obliged to
>>metamorphose yourself in a Stakhanov of the penis, you are not obliged to
>>organize a ****fest every evening !!!!
>>
>>Let me suggest you to stop your fantasies about the simple and daily life
>>Dave and try to built *your* own real and solid experience.

> Who said anything about ****ing?

You Dave, you are so transparent.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> "The Devil" > wrote in message
>> news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>
>>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.

>> So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>> him. This is the only way that this statement could be meaningful.
>> In fact Roy gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he
>> would capitalize on it every way he could.

> I suspect Roy may have discovered that whilst recording a private
> telephone conversation sans consent is legal in the UK, distributing
> said recording sans consent is not. Hence, this posturing.

It doesn't matter why broke the law - Roy broke the law, apparently quite
proudly.

It's obviously a trivial infraction.

>>> I made it because Arnii accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did
>>> not do--and I wanted
>>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.

>> This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation
>> - you can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>> Roy's only contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>> conversation. If this is the conversation I'm thinking of, my
>> daughter answered the phone, couldn't make heads or tales out of
>> Roy's drunken blathering but did catch my name, and handed the phone
>> off to me.

>> Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't
>> happened yet.

> BINGO! Only a drunk (or dope addict) on a binge would attempt a lame
> explanation like that.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that has reported Roy's drunken blathering
over the phone. If memory serves JJ mentioned it when Nousaine and I shared
a beer with jj and his brother-in-law Dr. Feng in Ann Arbor.

One thing that amazes me is how Stephen is defending this weirdness. Pretty
naive of him, eh?

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>
> > In article >,
> > The Devil > wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:31:31 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> >> wrote:
> >
> >>> This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
> >>> preparation - you can't make the tape after the conversation is
> >>> over. However, Roy's only contact with my daughter was at the
> >>> beginning at the conversation. If this is the conversation I'm
> >>> thinking of, my daughter answered the phone, couldn't make heads or
> >>> tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did catch my name, and
> >>> handed the phone off to me.
> >>>
> >>> Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't
> >>> happened yet.
> >>
> >> I think I'm going to cry.
> >
> > I'd laugh my head off, but that would imply that I know what's on the
> > recording. OTOH, the first bit's pretty funny all by itself.
>
> What's funny about it?

Well, I agree one can't record a conversation after it's over.

How much preparation would it take *you* to record a hypothetical
conversation such as a audio society meeting?

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> The Devil > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 18:31:31 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>>>> preparation - you can't make the tape after the conversation is
>>>>> over. However, Roy's only contact with my daughter was at the
>>>>> beginning at the conversation. If this is the conversation I'm
>>>>> thinking of, my daughter answered the phone, couldn't make heads
>>>>> or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did catch my name,
>>>>> and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roy couldn't have made the tape because of something that hadn't
>>>>> happened yet.
>>>>
>>>> I think I'm going to cry.
>>>
>>> I'd laugh my head off, but that would imply that I know what's on
>>> the recording. OTOH, the first bit's pretty funny all by itself.
>>
>> What's funny about it?
>
> Well, I agree one can't record a conversation after it's over.
>
> How much preparation would it take *you* to record a hypothetical
> conversation such as a audio society meeting?

Depends on how good a recording of exactly what and with how many helpers.

AES meeting are prone to have Q&A sessions, which are pretty tough to get a
clear recording of in a typical reverberent meeting room.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> One thing that amazes me is how Stephen is defending this weirdness. Pretty
> naive of him, eh?

Hi!

Stephen

[Lionel]

In >, MINe 109 wrote :

> In article >,
> Lionel > wrote:
>
>> In >, MINe 109
>> wrote :
>>
>> > http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
>>
>> I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
>> still alive.
>
> He also could have tried pouring the beer on the snow directly.

You say that because you aren' a real beer drinker.
Stephen, imagine the guy, he is desesperated...
....and you propose him to pour the beer directly in the snow ? Are you
really serious.

> Ob audio: Wasn't this depicted in Des pas sur la neige by Debussy?

I don't know but this sounds like a real "Debussian" title !

[MINe 109]

In article >,
Lionel > wrote:

> In >, MINe 109 wrote :
>
> > In article >,
> > Lionel > wrote:
> >
> >> In >, MINe 109
> >> wrote :
> >>
> >> > http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=104166&region=3
> >>
> >> I guess that his wife is doubly angry. He hasn't stop drinking and he is
> >> still alive.
> >
> > He also could have tried pouring the beer on the snow directly.
>
> You say that because you aren' a real beer drinker.
> Stephen, imagine the guy, he is desesperated...
> ...and you propose him to pour the beer directly in the snow ? Are you
> really serious.

Well, his nerves did need calming in a desperate situation and if the
beer's going to be lost anyway, why not? But wouldn't this be an easier
way than burying your car in the snow to drink that much?:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=739
4525

> > Ob audio: Wasn't this depicted in Des pas sur la neige by Debussy?
>
> I don't know but this sounds like a real "Debussian" title !

It isn't "Happy Trails"!

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"The Devil" > wrote in message
news:fd700153tq4s7kd0j276puff3hhdircucp@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:21:13 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> I'm sure I'm not the only one that has reported Roy's drunken
>> blathering over the phone. If memory serves JJ mentioned it when
>> Nousaine and I shared a beer with jj and his brother-in-law Dr. Feng
>> in Ann Arbor.

>> One thing that amazes me is how Stephen is defending this weirdness.
>> Pretty naive of him, eh?

> You never stop lying, do you? I've only ever had a few (very pleasant)
> phone conversations with JJ, and get on well with him.

Translation: JJ was being gracious and suffering a fool.

> I've never called him drunk.

Debating trade straw man argument. The issue at hand is not his drinking but
yours, Roy.

>I'm kind of sick of myself here because replying to
> your **** gives it the appearance of validity.

Then simply go away! ;-)

> JJ actually contacted
> me last time we spoke. He can't stand you, Arnii, as I think you
> already know. 'Redneck' was what he called you last time we spoke, as
> I recall.

Well that does it. If I had any doubts that you are lying Roy, that's it.

[Tom]

The coward Torry-boooy wrote

> You do know how dogs mark territory, doncha, dave? Do you like golden
> showers?

That ought to do it. I'm sure he's really irritated now. Goood show.

[Michael Conzo]

In article , "The Devil"
> wrote:

> I gave the recording to George because he asked for it and I trusted
> him. He did ask if he could pass it on to a few trusted friends, and I
> said that would be fine but I wanted to know who they were and not
> have the recording distributed freely. I now have no idea who has the
> recording, and I am EXTREMELY ANGRY this has happened.

So you proved to be stupid - - - you only have yourself to blame. The
concept of "George and trusted friends" - - -now there's a hoot.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Paul Dormer wrote:


>"Arny Krueger" emitted :
>
>>> JJ actually contacted
>>> me last time we spoke. He can't stand you, Arnii, as I think you
>>> already know. 'Redneck' was what he called you last time we spoke, as
>>> I recall.
>>
>>Well that does it. If I had any doubts that you are lying Roy, that's it.
>
>Since the cats out of the bag..
>
>No, he's not. JJ said something similar to me.
>
>
>S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t
>-----------------------------------
>It's Grim down south..
>
>

Since the subject has been broached by others, I''ll just say that JJ's
sentiments to me re. Krueger were very similar.



Bruce J. Richman

[Michael McKelvy]

"The Devil" > wrote in message
news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
>I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
> Arnii over the head at every opportunity. I made it because Arnii
> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way. It rubbed me up
> the wrong way to be accused of doing what he said I had done, and that
> is the only reason why I did what I did. It is not illegal to record
> phone conversations in this country so long as the equipment does not
> connect directly to someone else's phone line.
>
> I gave the recording to George because he asked for it and I trusted
> him.

What the hell for?

He did ask if he could pass it on to a few trusted friends, and I
> said that would be fine but I wanted to know who they were and not
> have the recording distributed freely. I now have no idea who has the
> recording, and I am EXTREMELY ANGRY this has happened.
>
Bull****. Anybody with an IQ in double digits, would know that George could
not be trusted with something like this and that passing a tape of Arny
around was bound to bite you in the ass if you actually cared.

[Lionel_Chapuis]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
>
> Bruce J. Richman said:
>
> [Slut]
> > >Seriously, what is wrong with you?
>
> > Severe cognitive limitations, many psychiatric problems, and a total lack of
> > self-awareness. He's also a chronic liar.
>
> Don't forget the raging Kroopologism infection.


When I see my colleague Sackman who is suffering of acute Midduistrose crisis I comfort myself saying that life could be worst. ;-)




----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[Lionel_Chapuis]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
>
> Bruce J. Richman said:
>
> [Slut]
> > >Seriously, what




----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[dave weil]

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:46:57 -0700, "Tom" > wrote:

>
>The coward Torry-boooy wrote
>
>> You do know how dogs mark territory, doncha, dave? Do you like golden
>> showers?
>
>That ought to do it. I'm sure he's really irritated now. Goood show.

You both MUST be kidding.

Of course I know how dogs mark their territory. That's why I used the
phrase "mark his territory" in the first place.

To think that a little annoying poodle like Lionel can get me mad is
pretty stupid. The most that someone could truthfully say is that I'm
mildly perplexed about his yapping at my heels. But to say that it
bothers me in any way is ludicrous. Most of the time, I just ignore
him. Sometimes I decide to indulge him, because apparently, he doesn't
get enough respect at home and I feel a little sorry for him. It
doesn't hurt me to throw him a few crumbs occasionally.

[Arny Krueger]

"Paul Dormer" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" emitted :
>
>>> JJ actually contacted
>>> me last time we spoke. He can't stand you, Arnii, as I think you
>>> already know. 'Redneck' was what he called you last time we spoke,
>>> as I recall.

>> Well that does it. If I had any doubts that you are lying Roy,
>> that's it.

> Since the cats out of the bag..

> No, he's not. JJ said something similar to me.

Dormer, it wouldn;t be the first time you liars tried to validate each
other.

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>
> Since the subject has been broached by others, I''ll just say that
> JJ's sentiments to me re. Krueger were very similar.

I smell a rat - how do you know that the person who called you was JJ?

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:46:57 -0700, "Tom" > wrote:
>
>
>>The coward Torry-boooy wrote
>>
>>
>>>You do know how dogs mark territory, doncha, dave? Do you like golden
>>>showers?
>>
>>That ought to do it. I'm sure he's really irritated now. Goood show.
>
>
> You both MUST be kidding.
>
> Of course I know how dogs mark their territory. That's why I used the
> phrase "mark his territory" in the first place.

LOL !

[Arny Krueger]

"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
k.net
> "The Devil" > wrote in message
> news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...

>> I gave the recording to George because he asked for it and I trusted
>> him.

IOW "George made him do it".

So, how does Roy respond to George lying to him? Roy turns right around and
helps George by attacking Arny!

Roy really showed George that he's not a man to be trifled with!

LOL!


> Bull****. Anybody with an IQ in double digits, would know that
> George could not be trusted with something like this and that passing
> a tape of Arny around was bound to bite you in the ass if you
> actually cared.

Agreed. Of course the bottom line is that Roy hates me and supports George
at just about every turn.

One dirty hand washes another.

[dave weil]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 02:53:57 +0000, Paul Dormer >
wrote:

>"Arny Krueger" emitted :
>
>>> JJ actually contacted
>>> me last time we spoke. He can't stand you, Arnii, as I think you
>>> already know. 'Redneck' was what he called you last time we spoke, as
>>> I recall.
>>
>>Well that does it. If I had any doubts that you are lying Roy, that's it.
>
>Since the cats out of the bag..
>
>No, he's not. JJ said something similar to me.

Well, he didn't use the word redneck to me, but he did say this:

"Well, I can hold an email discussion with Morein. That's more than
I can say for any of Greg, George, Arny or Howard...

And he's right, we HAVE to either elevate the level of the
discussion in this group, or anyone with anything to offer
is going to HAVE to leave".

And this:

"Hey, you forgot the spew Arny aimed at me just before I headed
off on vacation".

After these couple of posts, it was only a couple of months before he
finally just threw up his hands and left.

He and I exchanged about 30 emails over about a year. Virtually
everytime, they were initiated by him regarding something that I said
and there were usually two or three followups. As anyone who was
around then knows, he and I didn't get along when I first showed up on
RAO. But even our arguments never got nasty, and I'm happy to say that
I learned some things from him. And I know how frustrated he was at
the end of his time here. He considered Arnold and Howard half of the
problem and George and Trotsky the other half. To give the devil his
due though, once he said that Arnold was capable of being civil
"behind the scenes", which I assume means that he his head didn't spin
around and he didn't spit pea soup when they shared a beer once.

[Arny Krueger]

"Roy Briggs" > wrote in message
news:6jk101leuamkjdjcoprijncc7mb1g2bce5@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 07:42:55 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> IOW "George made him do it".
>>
>> So, how does Roy respond to George lying to him? Roy turns right
>> around and helps George by attacking Arny!
>>
>> Roy really showed George that he's not a man to be trifled with!
>>
>> LOL!
>
> You stupid ****ing cross-eyed, cross-dressing, cross-worshippping
> Jesus whore. You are totally and utterly insane. You are talking about
> a fictional character--me. This is my ****ing lawn, you cross-up-the-
> ass-by-candlelight hermit. Pack your bags of ****ing garbage into your
> ****ing shopping cart and go hang around someone else's lawn before I
> get all Reverend Wick on that ****-flap you talk out of and you're
> gargling my creamy communion love junk. Halitosis-****ing-lujah.

Translation: "Arny, you exposed me for the criminal and liar that I am".

S C O R E !

;-)

[Robert Morein]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Michael Conzo said:
>
> > So you proved to be stupid - - - you only have yourself to blame. The
> > concept of "George and trusted friends" - - -now there's a hoot.
>
> Did Arnii make you say that? You seem a bit .... odd.
>
>
"Michael Conzo" is Brian L. McCarty.

[Tom]

"Roy England" > wrote

> Translation: Everybody's lying except me, Arnii Krooger--I am always
> honest to a fault, and I suspect this quality goes a long way to
> explaining why I have enjoyed such a long, prosperous and rewarding
> 'career' posting messages on my ****ing lawn.


LOL. you are ****inghilarious.

whatchu bin doin?

[[email protected]]

Robert Morein wrote:
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Michael Conzo said:
> >
> > > So you proved to be stupid - - - you only have yourself to blame.
The
> > > concept of "George and trusted friends" - - -now there's a hoot.
> >
> > Did Arnii make you say that? You seem a bit .... odd.
> >
> >
> "Michael Conzo" is Brian L. McCarty.
>
>

And the evidence of this is?

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
oups.com
> Robert Morein wrote:
>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Michael Conzo said:
>>>
>>>> So you proved to be stupid - - - you only have yourself to blame.
>>>> The concept of "George and trusted friends" - - -now there's a
>>>> hoot.
>>>
>>> Did Arnii make you say that? You seem a bit .... odd.
>>>
>>>
>> "Michael Conzo" is Brian L. McCarty.
>>
>>
>
> And the evidence of this is?

He's posting from Australia. Everybody in Australia is himself the one and
only Brian McCarty. ;-)

[dave weil]

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:51:18 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Oh, I forgot that among the *Normals*, logic is beggared for the sake of
>hatred.

You know, SOMETIMES Arnold comes up with a nice turn of a phrase.

Kudos!

[[email protected]]

Arny Krueger wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Robert Morein wrote:
> >> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Michael Conzo said:
> >>>
> >>>> So you proved to be stupid - - - you only have yourself to
blame.
> >>>> The concept of "George and trusted friends" - - -now there's a
> >>>> hoot.
> >>>
> >>> Did Arnii make you say that? You seem a bit .... odd.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> "Michael Conzo" is Brian L. McCarty.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > And the evidence of this is?
>
> He's posting from Australia. Everybody in Australia is himself the
one and
> only Brian McCarty. ;-)
>
>


Maybe it's Doug Haugen, dialing long distance to Australia to throw the
bozos off the trail......wait, I'm Doug Haugen, so I would know,
wouldn't I? Wouldn't I? I'm so confused! ;-)

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
>>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>
>>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>
>>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him. This
>>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
>>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would capitalize on
>>it
>>every way he could.
>>
>>>I made it because Arnii
>>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>
>>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation - you
>>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's only
>>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If this
>>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
>>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did catch
>>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>
>
> Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims about
> Roy's
> sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that Roy is
> at all
> inebriated.

And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to know
whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny thought it.

I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
> this assessment.
>

I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody named
Richman.
>

[[email protected]]

Michael McKelvy wrote:
> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
> >>
> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
the
> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
batter
> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
> >>
> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
him. This
> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
Roy
> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
capitalize on
> >>it
> >>every way he could.
> >>
> >>>I made it because Arnii
> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
wanted
> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
> >>
> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
preparation - you
> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
only
> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation.
If this
> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
phone,
> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
did catch
> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
> >>
> >
> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
about
> > Roy's
> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that
Roy is
> > at all
> > inebriated.
>
> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
know
> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
thought it.
>
> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
> > this assessment.
> >
>
> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
named
> Richman.
> >

You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you backed
out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000 dollars
that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he is
stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is your
chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
Scott Wheeler

[Bruce J. Richman]

Robert Morein wrote:


>"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>
>> Michael Conzo said:
>>
>> > So you proved to be stupid - - - you only have yourself to blame. The
>> > concept of "George and trusted friends" - - -now there's a hoot.
>>
>> Did Arnii make you say that? You seem a bit .... odd.
>>
>>
>"Michael Conzo" is Brian L. McCarty.
>
>

That's a reasonable hypothesis. It would explain some of his idiotic false
claims. I alsoo noticed, belatedly, that he's posting from an Australian ISP,
so that also fits your theory.



Bruce J. Richman

[Robert Morein]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> > wrote in message
> oups.com
> > Robert Morein wrote:
> >> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Michael Conzo said:
> >>>
> >>>> So you proved to be stupid - - - you only have yourself to blame.
> >>>> The concept of "George and trusted friends" - - -now there's a
> >>>> hoot.
> >>>
> >>> Did Arnii make you say that? You seem a bit .... odd.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> "Michael Conzo" is Brian L. McCarty.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > And the evidence of this is?
>
> He's posting from Australia. Everybody in Australia is himself the one and
> only Brian McCarty. ;-)
>
"Michael Conzo" showed up first in another group, in another context, where
he was stalking either Sound Emporium, one of McCarty's favorite targets,
or me. I don't specifically remember.

However, there is another way to tell, if you are sensitive to the "voice"
of a post. No one, in my opinion, matches the unalloyed malevolence of his
voice. He seems captivated by the pursuit of his evil impulses.

McCarty has limited intelligence, compared to anyone else I've met on this
group. His range of verbal expression is limited. His mind runs in a rut,
and so do his posts. The recent posts by McCarty are intellectually at the
upper range of his capability. McCarty has specific experience in the area
of studio design, which he has shared with us here. It is unfortunate that
this knowledge is embedded in a person who I think is a truely psychopathic
individual.

After reading literally thousands of McCarty's posts, I believe a
comparative study would confirm this.

I haven't met anyone else on usenet like him.

[Michael McKelvy]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>> >>
>> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
> the
>> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
> batter
>> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>> >>
>> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
> him. This
>> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
> Roy
>> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
> capitalize on
>> >>it
>> >>every way he could.
>> >>
>> >>>I made it because Arnii
>> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
> wanted
>> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>> >>
>> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
> preparation - you
>> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
> only
>> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation.
> If this
>> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
> phone,
>> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
> did catch
>> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
> about
>> > Roy's
>> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that
> Roy is
>> > at all
>> > inebriated.
>>
>> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
> know
>> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
> thought it.
>>
>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>> > this assessment.
>> >
>>
>> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
> named
>> Richman.
>> >
>
> You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you backed
> out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000 dollars
> that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
> psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he is
> stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is your
> chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
> Scott Wheeler
>
When are you going to get it? I don't give a **** who he is. I've already
said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is. The one irrefutable fact
is that he's an asshole.

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message


> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.

> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic lapdog.

My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and months
at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you didn't pollute this
place with your delusional comments?

[Bruce J. Richman]

Scott Wheeler wrote:


>Michael McKelvy wrote:
>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>> >>
>> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>the
>> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>batter
>> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>> >>
>> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>him. This
>> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>Roy
>> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>capitalize on
>> >>it
>> >>every way he could.
>> >>
>> >>>I made it because Arnii
>> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>wanted
>> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>> >>
>> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>preparation - you
>> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
>only
>> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation.
>If this
>> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>phone,
>> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>did catch
>> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>about
>> > Roy's
>> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that
>Roy is
>> > at all
>> > inebriated.
>>
>> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>know
>> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>thought it.
>>
>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>> > this assessment.
>> >
>>
>> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>named
>> Richman.
>> >
>
>You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you backed
>out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000 dollars
>that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he is
>stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is your
>chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>Scott Wheeler
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements. He's a
proven liar that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years, yet
has failed to provide any evidence to support his idiotic lies.

McKelvy just exhibited, once again, how far he's willing to go to smear one of
Krueger's many enemies. He also demonstrated his stupdity in claiming that I
was a "mind reader" re. "Roy's" status on the telephone. Since Krueger claimed
Roy was drunk when he called him, no mind reading was involved to offer the
opinion that there was no evidence on the tape to indicate that Roy was drunk.

As he has done repeatedly for many years, McKelvy just demonstrated again why
his statements about me are both false and the product of a sick mind with no
moral values whatsoever.



Bruce J. Richman

[[email protected]]

Michael McKelvy wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
> >> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
> >> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
> >> >>
> >> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on
about
> >> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
> > the
> >> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
> > batter
> >> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
> >> >>
> >> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
> > him. This
> >> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
> > Roy
> >> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
> > capitalize on
> >> >>it
> >> >>every way he could.
> >> >>
> >> >>>I made it because Arnii
> >> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
> > wanted
> >> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
> >> >>
> >> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
> > preparation - you
> >> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
Roy's
> > only
> >> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
conversation.
> > If this
> >> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
> > phone,
> >> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
> > did catch
> >> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false
claims
> > about
> >> > Roy's
> >> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate
that
> > Roy is
> >> > at all
> >> > inebriated.
> >>
> >> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
> > know
> >> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
> > thought it.
> >>
> >> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share
in
> >> > this assessment.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
> > named
> >> Richman.
> >> >
> >
> > You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you
backed
> > out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000
dollars
> > that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
> > psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he
is
> > stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is
your
> > chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
> > Scott Wheeler
> >
> When are you going to get it?

I get it. you lie and deny it. If you weren't lying you would take the
bet as you claimed you would.


I don't give a **** who he is.


Irrelevant. You offered to make a bet and now you are backing out. You
lied.



I've already
> said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is.




Then why continue to tell lies?




The one irrefutable fact
> is that he's an asshole.




No, that's an opinion.




Scott Wheeler

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message


> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
> idiotic lies.

Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvey

1996 - 1
1997 - 3
1998 - 0
1999 - 0
2000 - 130
2001 - 84
2002 - 34
2003 - 337
2004 - 2,850 (est)

Since the posts in 1996 and 1997 were so few in number, I read them all.
IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies or find
that they are so similar that the could be reasonably thought to include the
same claim.

No matter how Richman postures, McKelvey could have only been making "the
same false claims" for 5 years at the most 5 years. That falls well short of
Richman's claimed almost 7 years.

I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvey) a proven liar that has
been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>
>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>> lapdog.
>>
>> My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>> months at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you
>> didn't pollute this place with your delusional comments?

> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
> anything I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".

Says you!

How many delusional people have you met who freely admit to being
delusional? Not many, I'd bet.

> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.

Richman, I'll shortly prove your recollection about that which you forcably
posture to be incredibly faulty.

> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that
> Middius had once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.

Lame, weak, hearsay.

> (This was part of his almost 7 year smear campaign questioning my
> identity).

I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous, McKelvey
has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years. Some years he did not
post at all, and other years he posted less than 4 times the whole year, He
most certainly did not mention a certain Dr Richman in those few posts.

Now Roichman these facts mean that you are either delusional or a liar,
given how many times and how vociferously you're repeated this crap about
McKelvey lying about you for 7 years. He couldn't have done it, since he was
for all practical intents and purposes, not posting here about you for all
of those seven years.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>> >>
>>> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>> the
>>> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>> batter
>>> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>> >>
>>> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>> him. This
>>> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>> Roy
>>> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>> capitalize on
>>> >>it
>>> >>every way he could.
>>> >>
>>> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>> wanted
>>> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>> >>
>>> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>> preparation - you
>>> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
>> only
>>> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation.
>> If this
>>> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>> phone,
>>> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>> did catch
>>> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>> about
>>> > Roy's
>>> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that
>> Roy is
>>> > at all
>>> > inebriated.
>>>
>>> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>> know
>>> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>> thought it.
>>>
>>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>> > this assessment.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>> named
>>> Richman.
>>> >
>>
>> You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you backed
>> out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000 dollars
>> that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>> psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he is
>> stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is your
>> chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>> Scott Wheeler
>>
>When are you going to get it? I don't give a **** who he is. I've already
>said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is. The one irrefutable fact
>is that he's an asshole.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

McKelvy has once again proven that he's a worthless piece of **** that will lie
on cue. This sociopathic imbecile just posted another set of lies about me,
and then trieed to weasel out of it.

There is no disputing the fact that this delusional moron has absolutely no
ability to tell the truth about hardly anything. He's clearly delusional and
has no credibility whatsoever.



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Scott Wheeler wrote:


>Michael McKelvy wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
>> >> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>> >> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on
>about
>> >> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>> > the
>> >> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>> > batter
>> >> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>> > him. This
>> >> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>> > Roy
>> >> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>> > capitalize on
>> >> >>it
>> >> >>every way he could.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>I made it because Arnii
>> >> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>> > wanted
>> >> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>> > preparation - you
>> >> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>Roy's
>> > only
>> >> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>conversation.
>> > If this
>> >> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>> > phone,
>> >> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>> > did catch
>> >> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false
>claims
>> > about
>> >> > Roy's
>> >> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate
>that
>> > Roy is
>> >> > at all
>> >> > inebriated.
>> >>
>> >> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>> > know
>> >> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>> > thought it.
>> >>
>> >> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share
>in
>> >> > this assessment.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>> > named
>> >> Richman.
>> >> >
>> >
>> > You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you
>backed
>> > out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000
>dollars
>> > that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>> > psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he
>is
>> > stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is
>your
>> > chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>> > Scott Wheeler
>> >
>> When are you going to get it?
>
>I get it. you lie and deny it. If you weren't lying you would take the
>bet as you claimed you would.
>
>
>I don't give a **** who he is.
>
>
>Irrelevant. You offered to make a bet and now you are backing out. You
>lied.
>
>
>
>I've already
>> said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is.
>
>
>
>
>Then why continue to tell lies?
>
>
>
>
>The one irrefutable fact
>> is that he's an asshole.
>
>
>
>
>No, that's an opinion.
>
>
>
>
>Scott Wheeler
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

McKelvy has once again been caught lying. He has once again made numerous
false stateements about me, been challenged by two people to put his money
where his lying mouth is, and has come up empty, like the sociopathic coward we
know him to be.

This lying creep was also afraid to call a telephone number and leave his name
on my answering machine because he knew that it would provide more evidence
that he could not distort, lie about, or otherwise mischaracterize. Since a
tape of both his vocie and mine would have then resulted, he could not have
lied about calling me after the fact. That's why he chickened out when he was
confronted.

If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about me (and
others as well), I'd have to change my name to Trump.



Bruce J. Richman

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message



> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about
> me (and others as well), I'd have to change my name to Trump.

Isn't Trump about bankrupt?

Brucie, didn't I just catch you lying at least 6 times about how long
McKelvey has been posting here about you?

or, were those 6 separate delusions?

LOL!

;-)

[dave weil]

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:19:33 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>
>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>> idiotic lies.
>
>Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvey
>
>1996 - 1
>1997 - 3
>1998 - 0
>1999 - 0
>2000 - 130
>2001 - 84
>2002 - 34
>2003 - 337
>2004 - 2,850 (est)
>
>Since the posts in 1996 and 1997 were so few in number, I read them all.
>IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies or find
>that they are so similar that the could be reasonably thought to include the
>same claim.

I guess "goggle" is lying to you again. Oh wait, I guess you're
correct that there are no posts in 1999 by "McKelvey". But if you're
talking about Mike McKelvy, you'll actually find hundreds of them.

Here's just one:

http://tinyurl.com/7xdje

According to the lionelgoldstandard, Arnold is lying.

<s******>

[dave weil]

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:26:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>
>I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous, McKelvey
>has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years.

AFAIK, "McKelvey" hasn't posted at RAO in any significant volume at
all during ANY period of time.

So, another "lie" by Mr. Krueger exposed for all to see...

[Bruce J. Richman]

Arny Krueger wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>> Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>>
>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>> lapdog.
>>>
>>> My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>>> months at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you
>>> didn't pollute this place with your delusional comments?
>
>> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
>> anything I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".
>
>Says you!
>
>How many delusional people have you met who freely admit to being
>delusional? Not many, I'd bet.
>
>> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.
>
>Richman, I'll shortly prove your recollection about that which you forcably
>posture to be incredibly faulty.

I doubt if you'll forcably prove anything.

>
>> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that
>> Middius had once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.
>
>Lame, weak, hearsay.
>

Bull****. It's a matter of Google record, and just another piece of evidence
in McKelvy's long disinformation smear campagn directed against me.


>> (This was part of his almost 7 year smear campaign questioning my
>> identity).
>
>I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous, McKelvey
>has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years. Some years he did not
>post at all, and other years he posted less than 4 times the whole year, He
>most certainly did not mention a certain Dr Richman in those few posts.
>
>Now Roichman these facts mean that you are either delusional or a liar,
>given how many times and how vociferously you're repeated this crap about
>McKelvey lying about you for 7 years. He couldn't have done it, since he was
>for all practical intents and purposes, not posting here about you for all
>of those seven years.
>
>


You're lying again, Krueger, since the Google record clearly indicates that
McKelvy has been lying about me for many years on RAO, with either clearly
mentioning my name or making nasty comments about me either to others (such as
yourself) or to me - without mentioning my name. Did you really thing by
using the phrase "mentioning my name" you could deceptively promote your latest
fabrications?

As for length of time on RAO, you're clearly lying or delusional, Krueger,
since your recently got caught starting an attack thread with my name in it in
which you clearly lied. You claimed that I started posting in 1999 when in
fact I started posting in 1998 (almost 7 years ago). So clearly, your
accusations about others being either delusional or lying are not worth the
bandwidth they waste.

Also, since you and McKelvy have made numerous false statements about my
identity, you are both, once again, either delusional or lying.



Bruce J. Richman

[dave weil]

On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:38:35 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>
>
>> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about
>> me (and others as well), I'd have to change my name to Trump.
>
>Isn't Trump about bankrupt?

From Forbes.com's report on Trump's 2004 report:

"Net Worth: $2.5 bil"

Sooooo, that would be a no.

But if you're talking about Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc, that's
a different story.

>Brucie, didn't I just catch you lying at least 6 times about how long
>McKelvey has been posting here about you?

Who is this "McKelvey"? I don't think that Dr. Richman has said
*anything* about such a person.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Dave Weil wrote:


>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:19:33 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>
>>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>>> idiotic lies.
>>
>>Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvey
>>
>>1996 - 1
>>1997 - 3
>>1998 - 0
>>1999 - 0
>>2000 - 130
>>2001 - 84
>>2002 - 34
>>2003 - 337
>>2004 - 2,850 (est)
>>
>>Since the posts in 1996 and 1997 were so few in number, I read them all.
>>IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies or find
>>that they are so similar that the could be reasonably thought to include the
>
>>same claim.
>
>I guess "goggle" is lying to you again. Oh wait, I guess you're
>correct that there are no posts in 1999 by "McKelvey". But if you're
>talking about Mike McKelvy, you'll actually find hundreds of them.
>
>Here's just one:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/7xdje
>
>According to the lionelgoldstandard, Arnold is lying.
>
><s******>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

As we all know, Krueger can be depended upon to provide false "evidence"
derived from data dredging, cherry picking and other deceptive practices.
McKelvy also posted under the name "mikeylikst":at one time, so Krueger's false
claims about him are quite obvious.



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Arny Krueger wrote"


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>
>
>> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about
>> me (and others as well), I'd have to change my name to Trump.
>
>Isn't Trump about bankrupt?
>
>Brucie, didn't I just catch you lying at least 6 times about how long
>McKelvey has been posting here about you?
>
>or, were those 6 separate delusions?
>
>LOL!
>
>;-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Krueger, both Dave Weil and myself, just finished exposing your lies about
McKelvy's posting history.

Or were those just delusions over which you had no control, Kroooooogy?


ROFLMAO !!!



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Dave Weil wrote:


>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:38:35 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>wrote:
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>
>>
>>> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about
>>> me (and others as well), I'd have to change my name to Trump.
>>
>>Isn't Trump about bankrupt?
>
>From Forbes.com's report on Trump's 2004 report:
>
>"Net Worth: $2.5 bil"
>
>Sooooo, that would be a no.
>
>But if you're talking about Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc, that's
>a different story.
>
>>Brucie, didn't I just catch you lying at least 6 times about how long
>>McKelvey has been posting here about you?
>
>Who is this "McKelvey"? I don't think that Dr. Richman has said
>*anything* about such a person.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Nor did I mention "Mikeylikst", another older name under which McKelvy posted.

Little Arny Krueger would love to be as "bankrupt" as Trump.


LOL !!!!



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Dave Weil wrote:


>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:26:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous, McKelvey
>>has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years.
>
>AFAIK, "McKelvey" hasn't posted at RAO in any significant volume at
>all during ANY period of time.
>
>So, another "lie" by Mr. Krueger exposed for all to see...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Absolutely. How hypocritical that Krueger, who has also posted in the past
under "Kruger" and other names would try and sell this latest pile of
Krueger-customized bull**** to RAO.

McKelvy also posted under the name, "Mikeylikst" at one time, so Krueger's
obvious and rather pathetic attempts to reinvent history are laughable.

LOL !!!!


(I guess "Goggle" was lying to him again).

(snicker)



Bruce J. Richman

[Arny Krueger]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message


Correction due to use of several posting IDs by subject of post.

> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>

>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>> idiotic lies.

> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvy

> 1996 - 3 (3 Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
> 1997 - 247 (many Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
> 1998 - 911 (many Mikeylikst) 13 mentions of Richman, one that cast
> aspersions on Richman's professionalism
> 1999 - 194 (Mikeylikst) 6 mentions of Richman, none claim that Richman
> isn't who he claims to be.
> 2000 - 148 (Mikeylikst) 3 mentions of Richman, none relate to his
> identity or profession 2001 - 84 (0 Mikeylikst) 5 mentions of Richman,
> none relate to his identity or profession 2002 - 34 (0 Mikeylikst)
> zero mentions of Richman 2003 - 337 (0 Mikeylikst) 37 mentions of
> Richman, definate aspersions on Richman's professionalism
> 2004 - 2,850 (est) (0 Mikeylikst)

> Since the richman-related posts in 1996 through 2000 were so few in
> number, I read them
> all. IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies
> or find that they are so similar that the could be reasonably
> thought to include the same claim. There was in fact one post in that 6
> year period that cast an asperson on Richman's professionalism.

> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvy could have only been making
> "the same false claims" for at the most 5 years. 3 years would be more
> reasonable That falls
> well short of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.

> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvy) a proven liar
> that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"

[Sander deWaal]

The Devil > said:

>......and I am EXTREMELY ANGRY this has happened.

The file is deleted.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

[Lionel_Chapuis]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
>
> Bruce J. Richman said:
>
> > I alsoo noticed, belatedly, that he's posting from an Australian ISP,
> > so that also fits your theory.
>
> So does Lionella. Isn't that special? ;-)

Qu'est-ce qui est spécial George ?




----------
Sent via SPRACI - http://www.spraci.com/ - Parties,Raves,Clubs,Festivals

[Sander deWaal]

"Arny Krueger" > said:

>>> "Michael Conzo" is Brian L. McCarty.

>> And the evidence of this is?

>He's posting from Australia. Everybody in Australia is himself the one and
>only Brian McCarty. ;-)


For those of us who are able to see past RAO, it could well be Phil
Allison. ;-)

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Scott Wheeler wrote:
>
>
>>Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>> > wrote in message
>>> oups.com...
>>> >
>>> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>> >> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>> >> ...
>>> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>> >> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on
>>about
>>> >> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>>> > the
>>> >> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>>> > batter
>>> >> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>>> > him. This
>>> >> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>>> > Roy
>>> >> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>>> > capitalize on
>>> >> >>it
>>> >> >>every way he could.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>> >> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>>> > wanted
>>> >> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>> > preparation - you
>>> >> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>>Roy's
>>> > only
>>> >> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>>conversation.
>>> > If this
>>> >> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>>> > phone,
>>> >> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>>> > did catch
>>> >> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false
>>claims
>>> > about
>>> >> > Roy's
>>> >> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate
>>that
>>> > Roy is
>>> >> > at all
>>> >> > inebriated.
>>> >>
>>> >> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>>> > know
>>> >> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>>> > thought it.
>>> >>
>>> >> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share
>>in
>>> >> > this assessment.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>>> > named
>>> >> Richman.
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> > You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you
>>backed
>>> > out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000
>>dollars
>>> > that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>>> > psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he
>>is
>>> > stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is
>>your
>>> > chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>>> > Scott Wheeler
>>> >
>>> When are you going to get it?
>>
>>I get it. you lie and deny it. If you weren't lying you would take the
>>bet as you claimed you would.
>>
>>
>>I don't give a **** who he is.
>>
>>
>>Irrelevant. You offered to make a bet and now you are backing out. You
>>lied.
>>
>>
>>
>>I've already
>>> said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Then why continue to tell lies?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>The one irrefutable fact
>>> is that he's an asshole.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>No, that's an opinion.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Scott Wheeler
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> McKelvy has once again been caught lying. He has once again made numerous
> false stateements about me, been challenged by two people to put his money
> where his lying mouth is, and has come up empty, like the sociopathic
> coward we
> know him to be.
>
> This lying creep was also afraid to call a telephone number and leave his
> name
> on my answering machine because he knew that it would provide more
> evidence
> that he could not distort, lie about, or otherwise mischaracterize. Since
> a
> tape of both his vocie and mine would have then resulted, he could not
> have
> lied about calling me after the fact. That's why he chickened out when he
> was
> confronted.
>
> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about me
> (and
> others as well), I'd be broke.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>>> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>>> the
>>>> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>>> batter
>>>> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>>> him. This
>>>> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>>> Roy
>>>> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>>> capitalize on
>>>> >>it
>>>> >>every way he could.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>>> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>>> wanted
>>>> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>> preparation - you
>>>> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
>>> only
>>>> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation.
>>> If this
>>>> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>>> phone,
>>>> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>>> did catch
>>>> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>>> about
>>>> > Roy's
>>>> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that
>>> Roy is
>>>> > at all
>>>> > inebriated.
>>>>
>>>> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>>> know
>>>> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>>> thought it.
>>>>
>>>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>>> > this assessment.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>>> named
>>>> Richman.
>>>> >
>>>
>>> You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you backed
>>> out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000 dollars
>>> that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>>> psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he is
>>> stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is your
>>> chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>>> Scott Wheeler
>>>
>>When are you going to get it? I don't give a **** who he is. I've
>>already
>>said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is. The one irrefutable
>>fact
>>is that he's an asshole.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> McKelvy has once again proven that he's a worthless piece of **** that
> will lie
> on cue. This sociopathic imbecile just posted another set of lies about
> me,
> and then trieed to weasel out of it.
>
> There is no disputing the fact that this delusional moron has absolutely
> no
> ability to tell the truth about hardly anything. He's clearly delusional
> and
> has no credibility whatsoever.
>
>
>
Inability to recognize sarcasm noted.

[Michael McKelvy]

Thanks for the efforts Arny, but please note proper spelling is McKelvy.

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>
>
>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>> idiotic lies.
>
> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvey
>
> 1996 - 1
> 1997 - 3
> 1998 - 0
> 1999 - 0
> 2000 - 130
> 2001 - 84
> 2002 - 34
> 2003 - 337
> 2004 - 2,850 (est)
>
> Since the posts in 1996 and 1997 were so few in number, I read them all.
> IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies or find
> that they are so similar that the could be reasonably thought to include
> the same claim.
>
> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvey could have only been making "the
> same false claims" for 5 years at the most 5 years. That falls well short
> of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.
>
> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvey) a proven liar that
> has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"
>
>
>
>
>

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>
>>>>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>>>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>>>>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>>>>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>
>>>>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him.
>>>>This
>>>>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
>>>>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would capitalize
>>>>on
>>>>it
>>>>every way he could.
>>>>
>>>>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>>>>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>
>>>>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation -
>>>>you
>>>>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's only
>>>>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If
>>>>this
>>>>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
>>>>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did
>>>>catch
>>>>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>>> about
>>> Roy's
>>> sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that Roy is
>>> at all
>>> inebriated.
>>
>>And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to know
>>whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny thought it.
>>
>
> As usual, your srtupidity is quick to surface. Krueger mentioned in this
> very
> thread that Roy was drunk when he called him. Thanks for demonstrating
> your
> willingness to lie about Krueger again.
>
>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>> this assessment.
>>>
>>
>>I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody named
>>Richman.
>>>
>
> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose delusions
> have
> polluted RAO for many years.
>

Most of RAO? Don't you mean the usual suspects of which there are about a
dozen?



> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic lapdog.
>
>
>
>
> Bruce J. Richman
>
>
>

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>
>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>
>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic lapdog.
>>
>>My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>>months
>>at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you didn't pollute
>>this
>>place with your delusional comments?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
> anything
> I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".
>
Every time you claim that I or Arny are anti-preference you are either lying
or delusional, take your pick.


> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.
>
> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that Middius
> had
> once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.

No I didn't, I read it on Google while search for something else. I haven't
bothered to find it again.

(This was part of his almost 7 year
> smear campaign questioning my identity).

The above is more of your delusional ranting.

When asked to prove it, this lying
> sack of **** said he would look it up and provide the evidence later.
> This
> happened within the last week or so. Needless to say, he never returned
> with
> the "evidence". So who's delulsional (besides you), Krueger.

See above.
>
> As far as McKelvy's frequency of posting on RAO, that's irrelevant and has
> nothing to do with the content of his posts.
>
>
>
Never let the truth get in the way of one of your lies, eh?

[Michael McKelvy]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>> Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>>
>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>> lapdog.
>>>
>>> My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>>> months at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you
>>> didn't pollute this place with your delusional comments?
>
>> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
>> anything I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".
>
> Says you!
>
> How many delusional people have you met who freely admit to being
> delusional? Not many, I'd bet.
>
>> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.
>
> Richman, I'll shortly prove your recollection about that which you
> forcably posture to be incredibly faulty.
>
>> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that
>> Middius had once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.
>
> Lame, weak, hearsay.
>
>> (This was part of his almost 7 year smear campaign questioning my
>> identity).
>
> I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous, McKelvey
> has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years. Some years he did
> not post at all, and other years he posted less than 4 times the whole
> year, He most certainly did not mention a certain Dr Richman in those few
> posts.
>
> Now Roichman these facts mean that you are either delusional or a liar,
> given how many times and how vociferously you're repeated this crap about
> McKelvey lying about you for 7 years. He couldn't have done it, since he
> was for all practical intents and purposes, not posting here about you for
> all of those seven years.
>
>
His mind(?) is made up, don't confuse him with facts.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Weil wrote:
>
>
>>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:26:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous,
>>>McKelvey
>>>has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years.
>>
>>AFAIK, "McKelvey" hasn't posted at RAO in any significant volume at
>>all during ANY period of time.
>>
>>So, another "lie" by Mr. Krueger exposed for all to see...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Absolutely. How hypocritical that Krueger, who has also posted in the
> past
> under "Kruger" and other names would try and sell this latest pile of
> Krueger-customized bull**** to RAO.
>
> McKelvy also posted under the name, "Mikeylikst" at one time, so Krueger's
> obvious and rather pathetic attempts to reinvent history are laughable.
>
> LOL !!!!
>
>
> (I guess "Goggle" was lying to him again).
>
> (snicker)
>
>
>
I guess you missed the post where he got the spelling correct.

You are still a liar or a delusional twit. Probably both.

[Arny Krueger]

"Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
nk.net
> Thanks for the efforts Arny, but please note proper spelling is
> McKelvy.

I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of the
searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.

Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been libeling him
for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to really like that 7 year
number!

[Lionel]

In >, Arny Krueger wrote :

> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> nk.net
>> Thanks for the efforts Arny, but please note proper spelling is
>> McKelvy.
>
> I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of the
> searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.
>
> Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been libeling him
> for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to really like that 7
> year number!


Do you mean that Dave Weil will have to play again to get his "daily
victory" ?

[Bruce J. Richman]

Arny Krueger wrote:


>"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message

>
>Correction due to use of several posting IDs by subject of post.
>

A fact that Krueger clearly knew prior to his lies ab out McKelvy's posting
history (under different names) on RAO re. myself.




>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>
>
>>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>>> idiotic lies.
>
>> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvy
>
>> 1996 - 3 (3 Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman

Since I was not posting on RAO at that time, this is one of the few statements
made by Krueger about McKelvy's posting history re. me that is not a lie.


>> 1997 - 247 (many Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman

Since I was not posting on RAO at that time, this is one of the few statements
made by Krueger about McKelvy's posting history re. me that is not a lie.



>> 1998 - 911 (many Mikeylikst) 13 mentions of Richman, one that cast
>> aspersions on Richman's professionalism

Krueger conveniently neglects to describe the content of Mckelvy's other
content re. me at that time. This also confirms my observation that McKelvy's
history of smearing me goes back almost 7 years.

It is also clear that McKelvy has been posting on RAO significantly longer than
I have.

It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them. Both Krueger
and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person does
not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a personal
insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this repeatedly.
repeatedly.


>> 1999 - 194 (Mikeylikst) 6 mentions of Richman, none claim that Richman
>> isn't who he claims to be.

It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them. Both Krueger
and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person does
not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a personal
insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this repeatedly.

>> 2000 - 148 (Mikeylikst) 3 mentions of Richman, none relate to his
>> identity or profession

It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them. Both Krueger
and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person does
not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a personal
insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this repeatedly.


2001 - 84 (0 Mikeylikst) 5 mentions of Richman,
>> none relate to his identity or profession 2002 - 34 (0 Mikeylikst)
>> zero mentions of Richman 2003 - 337 (0 Mikeylikst) 37 mentions of
>> Richman, definate aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>> 2004 - 2,850 (est) (0 Mikeylikst)
>

Krueger continues his deceptive posting.

It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them. Both Krueger
and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person does
not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a personal
insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this repeatedly.



>> Since the richman-related posts in 1996 through 2000 were so few in
>> number, I read them
>> all. IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies
>> or find that they are so similar that the could be reasonably
>> thought to include the same claim. There was in fact one post in that 6
>> year period that cast an asperson on Richman's professionalism.
>
>> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvy could have only been making
>> "the same false claims" for at the most 5 years. 3 years would be more
>> reasonable That falls
>> well short of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.
>
>> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
>> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvy) a proven liar
>> that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"
>
>
>

To summarize, Krueger's deceptive attempts to cherry pick McKelvy's posts
under only one pseudonym (McKelvey) while ignoring others, is clear evidence
that he was deliberately lying about McKelvy's prior posting history.

Also, it is pathetically obvious that McKelvy does not have to mention me by
name to conduct his typical smear campagian and invent more lies about me.
Therefore, the variable "mention by name" is essentially meaningless. So,
again, there if further evidence of Krueger's efforts to deceive the public by
lying.



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Dave Weil wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:26:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous,
>>>>McKelvey
>>>>has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years.
>>>
>>>AFAIK, "McKelvey" hasn't posted at RAO in any significant volume at
>>>all during ANY period of time.
>>>
>>>So, another "lie" by Mr. Krueger exposed for all to see...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Absolutely. How hypocritical that Krueger, who has also posted in the
>> past
>> under "Kruger" and other names would try and sell this latest pile of
>> Krueger-customized bull**** to RAO.
>>
>> McKelvy also posted under the name, "Mikeylikst" at one time, so Krueger's
>> obvious and rather pathetic attempts to reinvent history are laughable.
>>
>> LOL !!!!
>>
>>
>> (I guess "Goggle" was lying to him again).
>>
>> (snicker)
>>
>>
>>
>I guess you missed the post where he got the spelling correct.
>

I guess you forgot to correct him and admit that he lied in his original post.
Probably both.


>You are still a liar or a delusional twit. Probably both.
>

And you're a gutless liar who makes bets and then chickens out when challenged
to put up or shut up.

You're also a lying sack of **** and a delusional scumbag.




Bruce J. Richman

[Michael McKelvy]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>
>
> Correction due to use of several posting IDs by subject of post.
>
>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>
>
>>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>>> idiotic lies.
>
>> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvy
>
>> 1996 - 3 (3 Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>> 1997 - 247 (many Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>> 1998 - 911 (many Mikeylikst) 13 mentions of Richman, one that cast
>> aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>> 1999 - 194 (Mikeylikst) 6 mentions of Richman, none claim that Richman
>> isn't who he claims to be.
>> 2000 - 148 (Mikeylikst) 3 mentions of Richman, none relate to his
>> identity or profession 2001 - 84 (0 Mikeylikst) 5 mentions of
>> Richman, none relate to his identity or profession 2002 - 34 (0
>> Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman 2003 - 337 (0 Mikeylikst) 37
>> mentions of Richman, definate aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>> 2004 - 2,850 (est) (0 Mikeylikst)
>
>> Since the richman-related posts in 1996 through 2000 were so few in
>> number, I read them
>> all. IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies
>> or find that they are so similar that the could be reasonably
>> thought to include the same claim. There was in fact one post in that 6
>> year period that cast an asperson on Richman's professionalism.
>
>> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvy could have only been making
>> "the same false claims" for at the most 5 years. 3 years would be more
>> reasonable That falls
>> well short of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.
>
>> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
>> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvy) a proven liar
>> that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"
>
>
The only amendments might be under the name of RLSpeakers where I also never
mentioned him.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
> nk.net
>> Thanks for the efforts Arny, but please note proper spelling is
>> McKelvy.
>
> I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of the
> searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.
>
Ooops, you mean mikeylikst. :-)

> Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been libeling him
> for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to really like that 7
> year number!

If you wish to add the name Quackenbush you'll get a few more hits where I
was less than complimentary, but it still won't go back 7 years. I suppose
that's because as we all know Bruce is a nutcase, liar and hypocrite.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>>
>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>>>> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>>>> the
>>>>> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>>>> batter
>>>>> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>>>> him. This
>>>>> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>>>> Roy
>>>>> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>>>> capitalize on
>>>>> >>it
>>>>> >>every way he could.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>>>> wanted
>>>>> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>>> preparation - you
>>>>> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
>>>> only
>>>>> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation.
>>>> If this
>>>>> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>>>> phone,
>>>>> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>>>> did catch
>>>>> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>>>> about
>>>>> > Roy's
>>>>> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that
>>>> Roy is
>>>>> > at all
>>>>> > inebriated.
>>>>>
>>>>> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>>>> know
>>>>> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>>>> thought it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>>>> > this assessment.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>>>> named
>>>>> Richman.
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you backed
>>>> out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000 dollars
>>>> that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>>>> psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he is
>>>> stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is your
>>>> chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>>>> Scott Wheeler
>>>>
>>>When are you going to get it? I don't give a **** who he is. I've
>>>already
>>>said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is. The one irrefutable
>>>fact
>>>is that he's an asshole.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> McKelvy has once again proven that he's a worthless piece of **** that
>> will lie
>> on cue. This sociopathic imbecile just posted another set of lies about
>> me,
>> and then trieed to weasel out of it.
>>
>> There is no disputing the fact that this delusional moron has absolutely
>> no
>> ability to tell the truth about hardly anything. He's clearly delusional
>> and
>> has no credibility whatsoever.
>>
>>
>>
>Inability to recognize sarcasm noted.
>
>
>

Lying assholes with a documented history of spreading disinformation about Dr.
Richman such as McKelvy are not capable of sarcasm. They are also not capable
of honesty.


Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Scott Wheeler wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> oups.com...
>>>> >
>>>> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>> >> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>> >> ...
>>>> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>> >> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on
>>>about
>>>> >> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>>>> > the
>>>> >> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>>>> > batter
>>>> >> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>>>> > him. This
>>>> >> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>>>> > Roy
>>>> >> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>>>> > capitalize on
>>>> >> >>it
>>>> >> >>every way he could.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>>> >> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>>>> > wanted
>>>> >> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>>> > preparation - you
>>>> >> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>>>Roy's
>>>> > only
>>>> >> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>>>conversation.
>>>> > If this
>>>> >> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>>>> > phone,
>>>> >> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>>>> > did catch
>>>> >> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false
>>>claims
>>>> > about
>>>> >> > Roy's
>>>> >> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate
>>>that
>>>> > Roy is
>>>> >> > at all
>>>> >> > inebriated.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>>>> > know
>>>> >> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>>>> > thought it.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share
>>>in
>>>> >> > this assessment.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>>>> > named
>>>> >> Richman.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >
>>>> > You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you
>>>backed
>>>> > out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000
>>>dollars
>>>> > that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>>>> > psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he
>>>is
>>>> > stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is
>>>your
>>>> > chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>>>> > Scott Wheeler
>>>> >
>>>> When are you going to get it?
>>>
>>>I get it. you lie and deny it. If you weren't lying you would take the
>>>bet as you claimed you would.
>>>
>>>
>>>I don't give a **** who he is.
>>>
>>>
>>>Irrelevant. You offered to make a bet and now you are backing out. You
>>>lied.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I've already
>>>> said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Then why continue to tell lies?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>The one irrefutable fact
>>>> is that he's an asshole.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>No, that's an opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Scott Wheeler
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> McKelvy has once again been caught lying. He has once again made numerous
>> false stateements about me, been challenged by two people to put his money
>> where his lying mouth is, and has come up empty, like the sociopathic
>> coward we
>> know him to be.
>>
>> This lying creep was also afraid to call a telephone number and leave his
>> name
>> on my answering machine because he knew that it would provide more
>> evidence
>> that he could not distort, lie about, or otherwise mischaracterize. Since
>> a
>> tape of both his vocie and mine would have then resulted, he could not
>> have
>> lied about calling me after the fact. That's why he chickened out when he
>> was
>> confronted.
>>
>> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about me
>> (and
>> others as well), I'd be extremely wealthy.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>>>
>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>
>>>> My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>>>> months at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you
>>>> didn't pollute this place with your delusional comments?
>>
>>> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
>>> anything I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".
>>
>> Says you!
>>
>> How many delusional people have you met who freely admit to being
>> delusional? Not many, I'd bet.
>>
>>> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.
>>
>> Richman, I'll shortly prove your recollection about that which you
>> forcably posture to be incredibly faulty.
>>
>>> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that
>>> Middius had once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.
>>
>> Lame, weak, hearsay.
>>
>>> (This was part of his almost 7 year smear campaign questioning my
>>> identity).
>>
>> I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous, McKelvey
>> has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years. Some years he did
>> not post at all, and other years he posted less than 4 times the whole
>> year, He most certainly did not mention a certain Dr Richman in those few
>> posts.
>>
>> Now Roichman these facts mean that you are either delusional or a liar,
>> given how many times and how vociferously you're repeated this crap about
>> McKelvey lying about you for 7 years. He couldn't have done it, since he
>> was for all practical intents and purposes, not posting here about you for
>> all of those seven years.
>>
>>
>My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael Mckelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>
>>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>>
>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic lapdog.
>>>
>>>My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>>>months
>>>at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you didn't pollute
>>>this
>>>place with your delusional comments?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
>> anything
>> I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".
>>
>Every time you claim that I or Arny are anti-preference you are either lying
>or delusional, take your pick.
>
>

Bull****. It's an opinion I get to have. There is also clear evidence for it
concerning your comments about SS equipment and CD players, for example.


>> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.
>>
>> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that Middius
>> had
>> once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.
>
>No I didn't, I read it on Google while search for something else. I haven't
>bothered to find it again.

You said you would, and clearly could not find what does not exist. It was
just another attempt of yours to lie about my identity by using alleged
hearsay.



> (This was part of his almost 7 year
>> smear campaign questioning my identity).
>
>The above is more of your delusional ranting.
>
>

Bull****. It's an accurate account of your history of personal attacks against
me on RAO.


When asked to prove it, this lying
>> sack of **** said he would look it up and provide the evidence later.
>> This
>> happened within the last week or so. Needless to say, he never returned
>> with
>> the "evidence". So who's delulsional (besides you), Krueger.
>
>See above.
>>
>> As far as McKelvy's frequency of posting on RAO, that's irrelevant and has
>> nothing to do with the content of his posts.
>>
>>
>>
>Never let the truth get in the way of one of your lies, eh?
>
>

You haven't found any, liar.


And you don't know what the truth is, asshole.



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Roy wrote:


>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:53:21 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>wrote:
>
>>I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of the
>>searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.
>>
>>Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been libeling him
>>for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to really like that 7 year
>
>>number!
>
>Why are you lying again? You told me (and I've got it recorded) that
>you thought Mikey was dumb and ignorant but was going along the right
>lines when it came to audio, which is why you threw him the occasional
>crumb of encouragement. Don't be two-faced about it, Arnii, otherwise
>I will send Mikey that part of the recording.
>
>--
>td
>
>

Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal differences,
in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other whenever one
of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.

They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.




Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Head Case McKelvy lied:


>"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>> "Michael McKelvy" > wrote in message
>> nk.net
>>> Thanks for the efforts Arny, but please note proper spelling is
>>> McKelvy.
>>
>> I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of the
>> searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.
>>
>Ooops, you mean mikeylikst. :-)
>
>> Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been libeling him
>> for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to really like that 7
>> year number!
>
>If you wish to add the name Quackenbush you'll get a few more hits where I
>was less than complimentary, but it still won't go back 7 years. I suppose
>that's because as we all know Bruce is a nutcase, liar and hypocrite.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

The "we" in this case consisting of McKelvy, Krueger, Lionel and the voices in
their heads motivating their psychotic rantings and ravings.

McKelvy's lack of contact with reality is well known.; however, to many of us
that have seen the posts of this idiot on RAO.



Bruce J. Richman

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>> Correction due to use of several posting IDs by subject of post.

> A fact that Krueger clearly knew prior to his lies ab out McKelvy's
> posting history (under different names) on RAO re. myself.

Delsusions of omniscience and mind-reading noted.

> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvy

> 1996 - 3 (3 Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
> 1997 - 247 (many Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
> 1998 - 911 (many Mikeylikst) 13 mentions of Richman, one that cast
> aspersions on Richman's professionalism
> 1999 - 194 (Mikeylikst) 6 mentions of Richman, none claim that Richman
> isn't who he claims to be.
> 2000 - 148 (Mikeylikst) 3 mentions of Richman, none relate to his
> identity or profession 2001 - 84 (0 Mikeylikst) 5 mentions of Richman,
> none relate to his identity or profession 2002 - 34 (0 Mikeylikst)
> zero mentions of Richman 2003 - 337 (0 Mikeylikst) 37 mentions of
> Richman, definate aspersions on Richman's professionalism
> 2004 - 2,850 (est) (0 Mikeylikst)

> Since the richman-related posts in 1996 through 2000 were so few in
> number, I read them
> all. IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies
> or find that they are so similar that the could be reasonably
> thought to include the same claim. There was in fact one post in that 6
> year period that cast an asperson on Richman's professionalism.

> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvy could have only been making
> "the same false claims" for at the most 5 years. 3 years would be more
> reasonable That falls
> well short of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.

> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvy) a proven liar
> that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"


> To summarize, Krueger's deceptive attempts to cherry pick McKelvy's
> posts under only one pseudonym (McKelvey) while ignoring others, is
> clear evidence that he was deliberately lying about McKelvy's prior
> posting history.

A false presumption given that revising the statistics continued to support
the hypothesis that Richman has repeatedly and agressively made false claims
about McKelvy's postings. We see a common pattern here - McKelvy makes one
negative post about Richman in 1998, and Richman deceptively makes it sound
like Mckelvy has been attacking him non-stop for "almost 7 years".

> Also, it is pathetically obvious that McKelvy does not have to
> mention me by name to conduct his typical smear campagian and invent
> more lies about me.

Agreed - McKelvy could simply mention a RAO psychologist who postures
hysterically and obsesses nearly constantly about ancient slights, and
everybody would immediately know who he is talking about.

>Therefore, the variable "mention by name" is
> essentially meaningless. So, again, there if further evidence of
> Krueger's efforts to deceive the public by lying.

Yup, that's why I ate crow and posted a public correction of my earlier
post, as soon as I knew there was a problem.

[Arny Krueger]

"The Roy Brigg's" > wrote in message
news:e4g2015gfbak4lajvfnhaulb5fmcmdq0su@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:53:21 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of
>> the searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.
>>
>> Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been
>> libeling him for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to
>> really like that 7 year number!
>
> Why are you lying again? You told me (and I've got it recorded) that
> you thought Mikey was dumb and ignorant but was going along the right
> lines when it came to audio, which is why you threw him the occasional
> crumb of encouragement. Don't be two-faced about it, Arnii, otherwise
> I will send Mikey that part of the recording.

I can't ask you to break the law.

[Arny Krueger]

"The Roy Brigg's" > wrote in message
news:r9f20119kccfu86l0l86te5r2qnd955ee8@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:38:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>> This post is so embarassing to Roy that I'm going to put it into the
>> google archives under my name to keep him from deleting it.
>
> Let me copy it too.
>
> Why is it embarrassing? It's the truth.

That's why you went ballistic when I pointed out its lack of internal
integrity. I wasn't pointing out problems with your false claims.

> Is that why you think I would find it embarrassing? I don't care that
> it's archived.


> I made that
> recording to prove that the vile accusation you leveled at me about
> your daughter was false.

Obviously, I made that accusation *after* you recorded the conversation.

Therefore, you're lying.

> I am not responsible for distributing the recording,

No, an unknown thief came and stole the tape and immediately gave it to
Middius, solely by conincidence.

> although had you continued to accuse me of abusing your daughter on the
> phone,

Now you're saying I didn't accuse you of abusing my daughter?

> I would have had no compunction
> giving the file to anyone who said they believed you, with the proviso
> that the recipient was of the clear understanding the recording was
> not to be passed on further.

OK, so you have no respect for the law of your land. Why am I not surprised?

> I am not ashamed--not even a tiny bit--of what I did, Arnii.

I'm quite sure of that. Like any common thug you are not ashamed of breaking
the law of your land.

> You accused me of something--something I personally
> found disgusting--that you knew I could not refute.

But didn't you just say that you distributed the tape to refute what I said?

> It was my word versus yours.

It seems like my word is worth quite a bit, especially when what I say makes
sense and your claims don't hold water.

> We all know your word has meant pretty much nothing on
> RAO for years--everyone knows what a stinking, unremitting liar you
> are--but I wanted to prove that, just as you made up those porno
> emails, you also made up that accusation.

So, to review: Knowing that I would in the future accuse you of abusing my
daughter, you made a tape of a conversation that would not refute my future
accusuation, and distributed it to people who hate me against my will and
law of your land.

> Mission accomplished.

Indeed. You just screwed yourself up even worse than you had before.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Arny Krueger wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>> Correction due to use of several posting IDs by subject of post.
>
>> A fact that Krueger clearly knew prior to his lies ab out McKelvy's
>> posting history (under different names) on RAO re. myself.
>
>Delsusions of omniscience and mind-reading noted.
>

Obvious lying and posturing by Krueger noted. As one of RAO's most frequent
posters for all the years involved, who believes that Krueger failed to notice
that McKelvy posted under different names? As pointed out previously, Krueger
did the same thing (e.g. Kruger).



>> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvy
>
>> 1996 - 3 (3 Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>> 1997 - 247 (many Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>> 1998 - 911 (many Mikeylikst) 13 mentions of Richman, one that cast
>> aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>> 1999 - 194 (Mikeylikst) 6 mentions of Richman, none claim that Richman
>> isn't who he claims to be.
>> 2000 - 148 (Mikeylikst) 3 mentions of Richman, none relate to his
>> identity or profession 2001 - 84 (0 Mikeylikst) 5 mentions of Richman,
>> none relate to his identity or profession 2002 - 34 (0 Mikeylikst)
>> zero mentions of Richman 2003 - 337 (0 Mikeylikst) 37 mentions of
>> Richman, definate aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>> 2004 - 2,850 (est) (0 Mikeylikst)
>
>> Since the richman-related posts in 1996 through 2000 were so few in
>> number, I read them
>> all. IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies
>> or find that they are so similar that the could be reasonably
>> thought to include the same claim. There was in fact one post in that 6
>> year period that cast an asperson on Richman's professionalism.
>
>> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvy could have only been making
>> "the same false claims" for at the most 5 years. 3 years would be more
>> reasonable That falls
>> well short of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.
>
>> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
>> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvy) a proven liar
>> that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"
>
>
>> To summarize, Krueger's deceptive attempts to cherry pick McKelvy's
>> posts under only one pseudonym (McKelvey) while ignoring others, is
>> clear evidence that he was deliberately lying about McKelvy's prior
>> posting history.
>
>A false presumption given that revising the statistics continued to support
>the hypothesis that Richman has repeatedly and agressively made false claims
>about McKelvy's postings. We see a common pattern here - McKelvy makes one
>negative post about Richman in 1998, and Richman deceptively makes it sound
>like Mckelvy has been attacking him non-stop for "almost 7 years".
>


As previously pointed out, no specific mention of a person's name in a post is
needed to prove that the post has personal attack information directed at them.
Therefore, Krueger is once again insulting the intelligence of the public with
the latest false claims about McKelvy's posting history.




>> Also, it is pathetically obvious that McKelvy does not have to
>> mention me by name to conduct his typical smear campagian and invent
>> more lies about me.
>
>Agreed - McKelvy could simply mention a RAO psychologist who postures
>hysterically and obsesses nearly constantly about ancient slights, and
>everybody would immediately know who he is talking about.
>

A delusional set of false claims subscribed to only by you, McKelvy, and
Lionel, for the most part.

OTOH, if we were to talk about RAO's most widely hated and despised poster, and
self-described computer consultant who has lied about and smeared more
different individuals than any other poster, usually in content that clearly
indicates severe paranoia and delusional beliefs, we would all know where to
look.


>>Therefore, the variable "mention by name" is
>> essentially meaningless. So, again, there if further evidence of
>> Krueger's efforts to deceive the public by lying.
>
>Yup, that's why I ate crow and posted a public correction of my earlier
>post, as soon as I knew there was a problem.
>
>

You posted a *partial* correction only because you realized that your latest
efforts to lie with statistics would be quickly and easily exposed - by both
Dave Weil and myself.

[Clyde Slick]

<Lionel_Chapuis> wrote in message
...
> George M. Middius wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Bruce J. Richman said:
>>
>> [Slut]
>> > >Seriously, what is wrong with you?
>>
>> > Severe cognitive limitations, many psychiatric problems, and a total
>> > lack of
>> > self-awareness. He's also a chronic liar.
>>
>> Don't forget the raging Kroopologism infection.
>
>
> When I see my colleague Sackman who is suffering of acute Midduistrose
> crisis I comfort myself saying that life could be worst. ;-)
>
>
Nothing can be worse than living in France and working in the
sewers, except living in Detroit and having latrine duty.





----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Scott Wheeler wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>> > wrote in message
>>>>> oups.com...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>> >> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>> >> ...
>>>>> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>> >> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on
>>>>about
>>>>> >> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>>>>> > the
>>>>> >> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>>>>> > batter
>>>>> >> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>>>>> > him. This
>>>>> >> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>>>>> > Roy
>>>>> >> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>>>>> > capitalize on
>>>>> >> >>it
>>>>> >> >>every way he could.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>> >> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>>>>> > wanted
>>>>> >> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>>>> > preparation - you
>>>>> >> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>>>>Roy's
>>>>> > only
>>>>> >> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>>>>conversation.
>>>>> > If this
>>>>> >> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>>>>> > phone,
>>>>> >> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>>>>> > did catch
>>>>> >> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false
>>>>claims
>>>>> > about
>>>>> >> > Roy's
>>>>> >> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate
>>>>that
>>>>> > Roy is
>>>>> >> > at all
>>>>> >> > inebriated.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>>>>> > know
>>>>> >> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>>>>> > thought it.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share
>>>>in
>>>>> >> > this assessment.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>>>>> > named
>>>>> >> Richman.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you
>>>>backed
>>>>> > out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000
>>>>dollars
>>>>> > that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>>>>> > psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he
>>>>is
>>>>> > stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is
>>>>your
>>>>> > chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>>>>> > Scott Wheeler
>>>>> >
>>>>> When are you going to get it?
>>>>
>>>>I get it. you lie and deny it. If you weren't lying you would take the
>>>>bet as you claimed you would.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I don't give a **** who he is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Irrelevant. You offered to make a bet and now you are backing out. You
>>>>lied.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I've already
>>>>> said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Then why continue to tell lies?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The one irrefutable fact
>>>>> is that he's an asshole.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No, that's an opinion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Scott Wheeler
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> McKelvy has once again been caught lying. He has once again made
>>> numerous
>>> false stateements about me, been challenged by two people to put his
>>> money
>>> where his lying mouth is, and has come up empty, like the sociopathic
>>> coward we
>>> know him to be.
>>>
>>> This lying creep was also afraid to call a telephone number and leave
>>> his
>>> name
>>> on my answering machine because he knew that it would provide more
>>> evidence
>>> that he could not distort, lie about, or otherwise mischaracterize.
>>> Since
>>> a
>>> tape of both his vocie and mine would have then resulted, he could not
>>> have
>>> lied about calling me after the fact. That's why he chickened out when
>>> he
>>> was
>>> confronted.
>>>
>>> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about me
>>> (and
>>> others as well), I'd be extremely wealthy.
>>
>>
If only there were any. Since you've repeatedly failed to produce anything
other than my sarcastic opinions, one has to conclude you're lying again.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>
>>>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>>> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>>>>> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>>>>> the
>>>>>> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>>>>> batter
>>>>>> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>>>>> him. This
>>>>>> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>>>>> Roy
>>>>>> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>>>>> capitalize on
>>>>>> >>it
>>>>>> >>every way he could.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>>> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>>>>> wanted
>>>>>> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>>>> preparation - you
>>>>>> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
>>>>> only
>>>>>> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation.
>>>>> If this
>>>>>> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>>>>> phone,
>>>>>> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>>>>> did catch
>>>>>> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>>>>> about
>>>>>> > Roy's
>>>>>> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that
>>>>> Roy is
>>>>>> > at all
>>>>>> > inebriated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>>>>> know
>>>>>> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>>>>> thought it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>>>>> > this assessment.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>>>>> named
>>>>>> Richman.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you backed
>>>>> out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000 dollars
>>>>> that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>>>>> psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he is
>>>>> stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is your
>>>>> chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>>>>> Scott Wheeler
>>>>>
>>>>When are you going to get it? I don't give a **** who he is. I've
>>>>already
>>>>said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is. The one irrefutable
>>>>fact
>>>>is that he's an asshole.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> McKelvy has once again proven that he's a worthless piece of **** that
>>> will lie
>>> on cue. This sociopathic imbecile just posted another set of lies about
>>> me,
>>> and then trieed to weasel out of it.
>>>
>>> There is no disputing the fact that this delusional moron has absolutely
>>> no
>>> ability to tell the truth about hardly anything. He's clearly
>>> delusional
>>> and
>>> has no credibility whatsoever.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Inability to recognize sarcasm noted.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Lying assholes with a documented history of spreading disinformation about
> Dr.
> Richman such as McKelvy are not capable of sarcasm. They are also not
> capable
> of honesty.
>
>
OSAF, as usual.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
>>"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message

>>
>>Correction due to use of several posting IDs by subject of post.
>>
>
> A fact that Krueger clearly knew prior to his lies ab out McKelvy's
> posting
> history (under different names) on RAO re. myself.
>
>
>
>
>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>
>>
>>>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>>>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>>>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>>>> idiotic lies.
>>
>>> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvy
>>
>>> 1996 - 3 (3 Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>
> Since I was not posting on RAO at that time, this is one of the few
> statements
> made by Krueger about McKelvy's posting history re. me that is not a lie.
>
>
>>> 1997 - 247 (many Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>
> Since I was not posting on RAO at that time, this is one of the few
> statements
> made by Krueger about McKelvy's posting history re. me that is not a lie.
>
>
>
>>> 1998 - 911 (many Mikeylikst) 13 mentions of Richman, one that cast
>>> aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>
> Krueger conveniently neglects to describe the content of Mckelvy's other
> content re. me at that time.

What content re. you? Prove it.

This also confirms my observation that McKelvy's
> history of smearing me goes back almost 7 years.
>
But that'snot what you've been saying you say I have a 7 year history,
clearly I wasn't all that concerned about you if I only made 13 out 911
posts that were not complimentary.


> It is also clear that McKelvy has been posting on RAO significantly longer
> than
> I have.
>
> It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
> person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them.

Then prvoe that I did and how many times.

Both Krueger
> and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person
> does
> not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a
> personal
> insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this
> repeatedly.
> repeatedly.
>
Paranoia noted.
>
>>> 1999 - 194 (Mikeylikst) 6 mentions of Richman, none claim that Richman
>>> isn't who he claims to be.
>
> It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
> person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them.

Find the posts that I alluded to you without mentioning your name, post them
here.

Both Krueger
> and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person
> does
> not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a
> personal
> insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this
> repeatedly.
>
Prove it.

>>> 2000 - 148 (Mikeylikst) 3 mentions of Richman, none relate to his
>>> identity or profession
>
>
>
> 2001 - 84 (0 Mikeylikst) 5 mentions of Richman,
>>> none relate to his identity or profession 2002 - 34 (0 Mikeylikst)
>>> zero mentions of Richman 2003 - 337 (0 Mikeylikst) 37 mentions of
>>> Richman, definate aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>>> 2004 - 2,850 (est) (0 Mikeylikst)
>>
>
>>> Since the richman-related posts in 1996 through 2000 were so few in
>>> number, I read them
>>> all. IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies
>>> or find that they are so similar that the could be reasonably
>>> thought to include the same claim. There was in fact one post in that 6
>>> year period that cast an asperson on Richman's professionalism.
>>
>>> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvy could have only been making
>>> "the same false claims" for at the most 5 years. 3 years would be more
>>> reasonable That falls
>>> well short of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.
>>
>>> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
>>> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvy) a proven liar
>>> that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"
>>
>>
>>
>
> To summarize, Krueger's deceptive attempts to cherry pick McKelvy's posts
> under only one pseudonym (McKelvey) while ignoring others, is clear
> evidence
> that he was deliberately lying about McKelvy's prior posting history.
>
> Also, it is pathetically obvious that McKelvy does not have to mention me
> by
> name to conduct his typical smear campagian and invent more lies about me.
> Therefore, the variable "mention by name" is essentially meaningless.

OSAF, again. Face it you lied.

So,
> again, there if further evidence of Krueger's efforts to deceive the
> public by
> lying.
>
>
>
Thank you for once again proving that a lie to you, is anything you don't
like.

[Michael McKelvy]

"The Roy Brigg's" > wrote in message
news:e4g2015gfbak4lajvfnhaulb5fmcmdq0su@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:53:21 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>>I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of the
>>searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.
>>
>>Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been libeling him
>>for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to really like that 7
>>year
>>number!
>
> Why are you lying again? You told me (and I've got it recorded) that
> you thought Mikey was dumb and ignorant but was going along the right
> lines when it came to audio, which is why you threw him the occasional
> crumb of encouragement. Don't be two-faced about it, Arnii, otherwise
> I will send Mikey that part of the recording.
>
> --
Please do.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Dave Weil wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:26:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous,
>>>>>McKelvey
>>>>>has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years.
>>>>
>>>>AFAIK, "McKelvey" hasn't posted at RAO in any significant volume at
>>>>all during ANY period of time.
>>>>
>>>>So, another "lie" by Mr. Krueger exposed for all to see...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Absolutely. How hypocritical that Krueger, who has also posted in the
>>> past
>>> under "Kruger" and other names would try and sell this latest pile of
>>> Krueger-customized bull**** to RAO.
>>>
>>> McKelvy also posted under the name, "Mikeylikst" at one time, so
>>> Krueger's
>>> obvious and rather pathetic attempts to reinvent history are laughable.
>>>
>>> LOL !!!!
>>>
>>>
>>> (I guess "Goggle" was lying to him again).
>>>
>>> (snicker)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I guess you missed the post where he got the spelling correct.
>>
>
> I guess you forgot to correct him and admit that he lied in his original
> post.
> Probably both.
>
He'd already made the correction before I mentioned it.

>
>>You are still a liar or a delusional twit. Probably both.
>>
>
> And you're a gutless liar who makes bets and then chickens out when
> challenged
> to put up or shut up.
>
What bet is that?

> You're also a lying sack of **** and a delusional scumbag.
>
>
>
>
Prove it.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>>>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>
>>>>> My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>>>>> months at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you
>>>>> didn't pollute this place with your delusional comments?
>>>
>>>> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
>>>> anything I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".
>>>
>>> Says you!
>>>
>>> How many delusional people have you met who freely admit to being
>>> delusional? Not many, I'd bet.
>>>
>>>> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.
>>>
>>> Richman, I'll shortly prove your recollection about that which you
>>> forcably posture to be incredibly faulty.
>>>
>>>> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that
>>>> Middius had once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.
>>>
>>> Lame, weak, hearsay.
>>>
>>>> (This was part of his almost 7 year smear campaign questioning my
>>>> identity).
>>>
>>> I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous,
>>> McKelvey
>>> has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years. Some years he did
>>> not post at all, and other years he posted less than 4 times the whole
>>> year, He most certainly did not mention a certain Dr Richman in those
>>> few
>>> posts.
>>>
>>> Now Roichman these facts mean that you are either delusional or a liar,
>>> given how many times and how vociferously you're repeated this crap
>>> about
>>> McKelvey lying about you for 7 years. He couldn't have done it, since he
>>> was for all practical intents and purposes, not posting here about you
>>> for
>>> all of those seven years.
>>>


>>>
>My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts.

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the ass.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message

>>>
>>>Correction due to use of several posting IDs by subject of post.
>>>
>>
>> A fact that Krueger clearly knew prior to his lies ab out McKelvy's
>> posting
>> history (under different names) on RAO re. myself.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>
>>>>> And I'll match your wager against McKelvy's delusional statements.
>>>>> He's a proven liar that has been making the same false claims for
>>>>> almost 7 years, yet has failed to provide any evidence to support his
>>>>> idiotic lies.
>>>
>>>> Google counts of RAO Posts by McKelvy
>>>
>>>> 1996 - 3 (3 Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>>
>> Since I was not posting on RAO at that time, this is one of the few
>> statements
>> made by Krueger about McKelvy's posting history re. me that is not a lie.
>>
>>
>>>> 1997 - 247 (many Mikeylikst) zero mentions of Richman
>>
>> Since I was not posting on RAO at that time, this is one of the few
>> statements
>> made by Krueger about McKelvy's posting history re. me that is not a lie.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> 1998 - 911 (many Mikeylikst) 13 mentions of Richman, one that cast
>>>> aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>>
>> Krueger conveniently neglects to describe the content of Mckelvy's other
>> content re. me at that time.
>
>What content re. you? Prove it.
>
>

No need to prove anything to a proven lying sack opf **** like yourself.
Krueger has already indicated that you made negative remarks about my
professionalism at that time.

Prove that you know anything at all about how I act in my professional
envirnoment.

Prove that RAO is a professional environment that reflects how people act
professionally.

You can't, because it is not, you idiot.


This also confirms my observation that McKelvy's
>> history of smearing me goes back almost 7 years.
>>
>But that'snot what you've been saying you say I have a 7 year history,
>clearly I wasn't all that concerned about you if I only made 13 out 911
>posts that were not complimentary.
>
>

Quality, not quantity. Thanks for admitting that you started smearing me many
years ago.


>> It is also clear that McKelvy has been posting on RAO significantly longer
>> than
>> I have.
>>
>> It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
>> person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them.
>
>Then prvoe that I did and how many times.
>
>

Prove that comments in which you either mentioned my name or responded to me
did *not* contain personal insults. You demand proof but provide none for the
numerous lies you've been telling for many years about me. By your own
admission above, you've made negative posts about me.

Both Krueger
>> and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person
>> does
>> not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a
>> personal
>> insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this
>> repeatedly.
>> repeatedly.
>>
>Paranoia noted.

Inappropriate use of term "paranoia" noted. Bull**** noted. Observation of a
basic fact - i.e. that a post does not have to contain a person's name per se
to contain negative comments about them.
For example, responding directly to that person like you typically do with a
slew of juvenile insults, while not mentioning that person's name - is a
perfect example of that.



>>> 1999 - 194 (Mikeylikst) 6 mentions of Richman, none claim that Richman
>>>> isn't who he claims to be.
>>
>> It is also quite obvious that a person does not have to mention another
>> person's name specifically, to throw a personal insult at them.
>
>Find the posts that I alluded to you without mentioning your name, post them
>here.
>
>

Since you start your bogus demands for proof, I will be glad to post the
response you hate the most at the end of this article.

Prove that you haven't deliberately and repeatedly lied about my identity, my
professional activities, my credentials, and my training.

Before asking others for proof, provide it yourself, hypocrite.

Both Krueger
>> and McKelvy have demonstrated this It is also quite obvious that a person
>> does
>> not have to mention another person's name specifically, to throw a
>> personal
>> insult at them. Both Krueger and McKelvy have demonstrated this
>> repeatedly.
>>
>Prove it.

See above.



>>> 2000 - 148 (Mikeylikst) 3 mentions of Richman, none relate to his
>>>> identity or profession
>>
>>
>>
>> 2001 - 84 (0 Mikeylikst) 5 mentions of Richman,
>>>> none relate to his identity or profession 2002 - 34 (0 Mikeylikst)
>>>> zero mentions of Richman 2003 - 337 (0 Mikeylikst) 37 mentions of
>>>> Richman, definate aspersions on Richman's professionalism
>>>> 2004 - 2,850 (est) (0 Mikeylikst)
>>>
>>
>>>> Since the richman-related posts in 1996 through 2000 were so few in
>>>> number, I read them
>>>> all. IMO, it would take a real paranoid to call them delusional or lies
>>>> or find that they are so similar that the could be reasonably
>>>> thought to include the same claim. There was in fact one post in that 6
>>>> year period that cast an asperson on Richman's professionalism.
>>>
>>>> No matter how Richman postures, McKelvy could have only been making
>>>> "the same false claims" for at the most 5 years. 3 years would be more
>>>> reasonable That falls
>>>> well short of Richman's claimed almost 7 years.
>>>
>>>> I therefore conclude that Richman has again impugned himself with his
>>>> thoughtless boiler-plate claim that "He's (McKelvy) a proven liar
>>>> that has been making the same false claims for almost 7 years"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> To summarize, Krueger's deceptive attempts to cherry pick McKelvy's posts
>> under only one pseudonym (McKelvey) while ignoring others, is clear
>> evidence
>> that he was deliberately lying about McKelvy's prior posting history.
>>
>> Also, it is pathetically obvious that McKelvy does not have to mention me
>> by
>> name to conduct his typical smear campagian and invent more lies about me.
>> Therefore, the variable "mention by name" is essentially meaningless.
>
>OSAF, again. Face it you lied.
>
>

Bull****. You're trying to cover up Kruegter's deceptive statistics while
defending your own negative posting history.




So,
>> again, there if further evidence of Krueger's efforts to deceive the
>> public by
>> lying.
>>
>>
>>
>Thank you for once again proving that a lie to you, is anything you don't
>like.
>
>
>


Thank you for providing evidence of yet another post in which my name was never
mentioned by McKelvy, yet he managed to fill it with his typical delusion-based
personal insults.

Almost every post that McAKelvy has written in direct response to me, does not
contain any mention of my name other than the first line - which is copied
automatically by Google groups unless edited out by the author.

Since McKelvy once again thinks he's entitled to "proof":but gives none to back
up his bull****, here's an example of the kind of proof that has been provided
in the past to this lying sack of ****:

------------------------------------------------------------
In response to proven libeler and pathological liar McKelvy's continued
repetition of false claims, coupled with a laughable "demand" that I produce
evidence that he has a lengthy history of lying and libeling me on RAO, I
decided to call this cretin's pathetic attempts to dodge responsibility for his
despicable behavior with the following response.

A couple of observations, should be added re. my post of April 9, 2004, which
is reproduced below:

1. In the first example of libel by McKelvy which I cite, he initiated libel
thread with the title "Richman's ethical lapses". It is worth noting that he
does not and CAN NOT list any. So obviously, his sole purpose was to libel and
defame another person. I chose to ignore this piece of unprovoked garbage
which he initiated. As did every other RAO poster.

2. As of the time of this writing, 4:00 PM EST on 4/10/04, the proven liar and
libeler Mckelvy has failed to respond directly to the post reproduced below.
It is obvious that his latest bluff/bull**** has been called and he's been
exposed for what most on RAO already have known him to be for a long time - a
hatemongering, bitter, delusional liar and character assassin whose primary
purpose in posting on RAO is to smear others with whatever lies, libelous false
claims and libelous labels of other people his diseased, delusional "mind"
(such as it is in its primitive state) can regurgitate.

3. Proven liar and libeler McKelvy has been challenged to submit his delusional
"complaints" about my professional and ethical behavior (about which he has
admitted he knows nothing - one of the few true things he has ever said) to the
appropriate licensing board in my state. Of course, he has failed to do so,
most likely because he knows that he's full of it, and will be sued by me after
he does so.

4. I could have provided many more examples of McKelvy's compulsive lies and
libels against me, but felt that for now, 2 would be sufficient. Pending the
results of Mr. Wheeler's case, and in consultation with my attornies, I may
elect to pursue legal action against him and use a quite impressive and lengthy
file of false, libelous claims he has made against me as evidence. No doubt,
he will "help" by continuing to provide further evidence that can be used
against him.

5. I apologize for the lengfh of this post in advance, but in consideration of
McKelvy's obvious compulsive, pathological responses which almost always
consist of further lies and libelous false statements about me, this response
is IMHO, quite appropriate.

6. This response will be the one used in the future to deal with McKelvy's
subsequent sociopathic, delusional, false, and libelous personal attacks
against me.




Mike McKelvy continues to avoid providing proof of his slander:
>>From: (Bruce J. Richman)
>
>>Mike McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>From: (Bruce J. Richman)
>>>
>>
>><deletion of further lies in which McKelvy tries to avoid responsibility for
>>lengthy history of lying and committing slander re. my credentials, training
>>and professional activities.>
>>
>>This despicable scumbag, after first admitting he knows nothing about my
>>credentials, training and professional activities, then laughingly trying to
>>claim his slanderous bull**** was merely opinions, and now attempting to
>deny
>>all responsibility for his ridiculous lies ? insults the intelligence of
>all
>>RAO readers.
>>
>>His requests for "proof" ? like all his imbecilic grunts and mutterings
>>concerning me ? are a joke. As is his very RAO existence.
>>
>>While he continue to deny slandering me, and requesting proof, his
>>credibility
>>remains zero (except perhaps, in the eyes of his hero, Krueger).
>>
>>His false claims re. my professional background are a matter of Google
>>record,
>>and virtually all RAO readers at all familiar with this sociopath's
>imbecilic
>>bull**** re. my background know this to be the case.
>>
>>Since he's been purveying lies about me, he needs to present the proof for
>>all
>>his nonsense, or stick his head further up the orifice in which it's
>>obviously
>>been inserted for so long.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Bruce J. Richman
>>
>

<repetitive bull**** similar to that pruveyed over a 6 year period by this
pathological liar and proven slanderer deleted>

For this pathological liar, all false claims about another person's training,
credentials, professional experience, etc. ? are only "opinions" ? a piece of
bull**** nobody other than this lying cretin believes.

Here's just one example of his slander:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF?8&threadm=vthbp0ffk2j625%
40corp.supernews.com&rnum=7&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DMcKelvy%2Band%2Blicensing%2
Bboard%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26t ab%3Dwg

Note that this was an attack thread started by McKelvy, in which this fool,
reproduces the Ethical Code followed by psychologists.

Note the slanderous title of the post.

Note also the question, this proven slanderer asks in the last line after
quoting the Ethical code.

Needless to say, this pathological liar has no evidence that I have ever
committed any ethics violations, and in fact his use of the title of this
thread, to which nobody responded, constitutes slander.

I have directly challenged this despicable cretin and proven liar to submit any

complaints he has to the Florida State Licensing Board. He has refused to do
so, because he knows he's been lying about me for 6 years.

This fool, in a conversation with Scott Wheeler commiitted another blatant lie:


"The person claiming to be B.J. Richman, a Ph.D is a fake as should be
obvious to anybody with more than 2 active neurons."

The reference for this is
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF?8&selm=vtg1igk0458h89%40c
orp.supernews.com

Now, no doubt, proven liar and slanderer McKelvy will claim he's just voiced an
opinion, but defamation and libel of a licensed psychologist, whose identity is

acknowledged and has been proven on RAO to the satisfaction of virtually all
conscious lifeforms with the exception of McKelvy and Krueger, is *not* an
opinion.

His lies are a matter of public record, and these 2 examples are just a few of
many that could be easily obtained from the Google record.

He has also deliberately ignored the following evidence presented on Google:

"The University of Texas at Austin, has long had one of the most highly
regarded
doctoral programs in Clinical Psychology in the United States (top 10
ranking). Since I had the good fortune to have a very good record in my
Master's propgram at Clinical Psychology at Boston College,l and perhaps
becauise I hit the 99th %ile on the Graduate Record Examination (Verbal
Portion) and the 99th %ile examination on the Psychology Acvhievement section,
I had the rather odd experience of being actively recruited by schools to which
I applied. (I had always thought this just happened to jocks, but I was
wrong). One unforgettable day, I got a call from the head of the Clinical
Psychology program at the University of Texas, a Dr. James Bieri, who basically
said "We've seen your application, we'd like you to come here, and we're
prepared to make you a nice offfer". That nice offer, which I accepted, turned
out to be a NIMH (National Institutes of Mental Health) Traineeship in Clinical
Psychology, for an unlimited period of time, with no strings attached other
than that I meet the academic requirements of the program (maintain a B
average).. It took care of all my expenses (tuition, room & board, books,
etc.) and gave me s small stipend to live on as well. Some of my classmates
congratulated me on my good fortune (many of them had to accept teaching
assistantships to help pay their bills, while all I had to do was hit the
books). The program turned out to be a real meatgrinder (as one of my
classmates put it). It made my undergraduate program at an elite "small Ivy
League school" (Bowdoin College) and my M.A. program seem like kindergarten.
Almost everybody in my entering class of about 20 had either a Phi
Beta Kappa key, was published and or came from Ivy League schools or places
like U. of Chicago, Stanford or Berkeley. Of the 20 who started the program,
only 5 of us survived and got our doctorates. It took not only a high degree
of intelligence and perserverance, but also a large ability to deal with the
stress of knowing that you were in a program with a very high attrition rate
and some professors, who frankly, until you got to the 2nd year and had "paid
your dues", didn't give a damn if you survived or not. I'll never forgot one
of my Statistics professors who used to get up in front of the class and say
"Even if you don't make it through graduate school, you can still be a good
citizen""

and the following:

"I was accepted for an Internship in Clnical
Psycnology at Massachusetts General Hospital, which I accepted and completed"

and the followiong:

"After obtaining my doctorate, I was
also accepted for postdoctoral training at Temple Medical School, Department of
Psychiary, Institute for Behavior Therapy, in Philadelphia. I enjoyed my time
there had learned a lot under the supervision of the late Dr. Joseph Wolpe, a
world famous psychiatrist who is considered to be one of the founders of
Cognitive?Behavioral Therapy, the predominant type of therapy now practiced by
most psychologists and psychiatrists (aside from pharmacotherapy). "

The above quotes are from a post written in response to Howard Ferstler,
another well known zealot, pathological liar, and purveyor of libel on RAO (not
surprisingly, frequently defended by Krueger, McKelvy's role model).

The complete post (and thread) can be referened at:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF?8&selm=20030203225629.076
19.00000418%40mb?mg.aol.com&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DFerstler%2Band%2BRichman%2B
and%2BUniversity%2Bof%2BTexas%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26 ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26ta
b%3Dwg

So McKelvy's slandeous claims about quacks, frauds, and fakes are nothing more
than the delusional, sociopathic rantings and repetitions of a proven liar and
libeler.

No doubt he will claim that this is all made up, but the only thing made up are
his nonsensical departures from reality which pollute RAO whenever he continues
to libel me and others.

One further fact, which I may or may not be able to prove since it happened a
long time ago, and I don't know if the radio station keeps records. And I
challenge the cretin and liar, McKelvy, to disprove it ? LOL! :

In about 1976 or 1977, I was employed as the "Psychology Director" of a private
Cardiac Rehabilitation Center based in Miami, Florida. The center ran a
30?day, interdisciplinary inpatient program for patients who were either at
high risk for cardiac disease or had already undergone such procedures as
cardiac bypass surgery. My main responsibility was to direct the behavioral
component of this intensive program (which also involved dieticians, exercise
physiologists, cardiologists, and RNs). Areas such as stress management,

smoking cessation, behavioral approaches to obesity, etc. were among the
targets that I had to address. One of my other responsibilities was, in
conjunction with the medical director, to promote the program through various
media appearances in both TV and radio. Two interviews in particular stand out
in my mind. The first came in the wee hours of the morning in New York City on
a nationally syndicated program ? "The Long John Nebel Show" (New Yorkers old
enough may remember this). The second occurred in my home base on the 79th
Street Causeway in Miami Beach at a radio station where Miami's best known talk
show host (at the time) was carrying forth ? I spent 2 hours being interviewed
very incisively on the main topic which was "Stress and Heart Disease". I
remember coming away from that interview thinking that the interviewer was very
sharp and well prepared to really grill me. The name of the radio station (and
I'm relying on long ago recall was, I believe either WKAT or WIOD). The name
of the host ? Larry King.

Shortly thereafter, Larry left Miami and the rest is history.

I challenge the proven liar, and libeler, McKelvy to dispute any of these facts
with any factual evidence he cares to fabricate from the diseased empty spaces
composing his deluded cranium.

No doubt he will choose to delete most of this post instead.

LOL!!!

(I apologize for appearing to be bragging about past or present
accomplishments, but since this despicable, loudmouthed, unbelievably stupid,
delusional, libeler and liar decided to completely embarass himself once again,
it was just too tempting to not assist him in making a fool of himself and
exposing his sociopathic behavior once again).

Nothing more needs to be said about his lies, so when he responds with more
bull****, I will respond with a standard, previously used, canned response that
perfectly describes this moron's basic character, motivations, and irrational
behaviors.

Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
(FL PY 2543)











Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose
>>>>>>> delusions have polluted RAO for many years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My recollection is that Mike has stayed away from RAO for months and
>>>>>> months at a time. OTOH Richman, has there been a month when you
>>>>>> didn't pollute this place with your delusional comments?
>>>>
>>>>> You're lying again, Krueger. There is no evidence to indicate that
>>>>> anything I've said constittutes a "delusional comment".
>>>>
>>>> Says you!
>>>>
>>>> How many delusional people have you met who freely admit to being
>>>> delusional? Not many, I'd bet.
>>>>
>>>>> Your recollection about many things has been shown to be faulty.
>>>>
>>>> Richman, I'll shortly prove your recollection about that which you
>>>> forcably posture to be incredibly faulty.
>>>>
>>>>> As for McKelvy, he recently blatantly lied when he claimed that
>>>>> Middius had once thought I was a Gindi sockpuppet.
>>>>
>>>> Lame, weak, hearsay.
>>>>
>>>>> (This was part of his almost 7 year smear campaign questioning my
>>>>> identity).
>>>>
>>>> I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous,
>>>> McKelvey
>>>> has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years. Some years he did
>>>> not post at all, and other years he posted less than 4 times the whole
>>>> year, He most certainly did not mention a certain Dr Richman in those
>>>> few
>>>> posts.
>>>>
>>>> Now Roichman these facts mean that you are either delusional or a liar,
>>>> given how many times and how vociferously you're repeated this crap
>>>> about
>>>> McKelvey lying about you for 7 years. He couldn't have done it, since he
>>>> was for all practical intents and purposes, not posting here about you
>>>> for
>>>> all of those seven years.
>>>>
>
>
>>>>
>>My mind is made up, don't confuse me with facts.
>
>I wouldn't know a fact if it bit me on the ass.
>
>
>

Thank you for sharing that with us.







>
>
>
>


Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Scott Wheeler wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>> > wrote in message
>>>>>> oups.com...
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>> >> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>> >> ...
>>>>>> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>>> >> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on
>>>>>about
>>>>>> >> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>>>>>> > the
>>>>>> >> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>>>>>> > batter
>>>>>> >> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>>>>>> > him. This
>>>>>> >> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>>>>>> > Roy
>>>>>> >> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>>>>>> > capitalize on
>>>>>> >> >>it
>>>>>> >> >>every way he could.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>>> >> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>>>>>> > wanted
>>>>>> >> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>>>>>> > preparation - you
>>>>>> >> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
>>>>>Roy's
>>>>>> > only
>>>>>> >> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
>>>>>conversation.
>>>>>> > If this
>>>>>> >> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>>>>>> > phone,
>>>>>> >> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>>>>>> > did catch
>>>>>> >> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false
>>>>>claims
>>>>>> > about
>>>>>> >> > Roy's
>>>>>> >> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate
>>>>>that
>>>>>> > Roy is
>>>>>> >> > at all
>>>>>> >> > inebriated.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>>>>>> > know
>>>>>> >> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>>>>>> > thought it.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share
>>>>>in
>>>>>> >> > this assessment.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>>>>>> > named
>>>>>> >> Richman.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you
>>>>>backed
>>>>>> > out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000
>>>>>dollars
>>>>>> > that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>>>>>> > psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he
>>>>>is
>>>>>> > stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is
>>>>>your
>>>>>> > chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>>>>>> > Scott Wheeler
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> When are you going to get it?
>>>>>
>>>>>I get it. you lie and deny it. If you weren't lying you would take the
>>>>>bet as you claimed you would.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't give a **** who he is.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Irrelevant. You offered to make a bet and now you are backing out. You
>>>>>lied.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I've already
>>>>>> said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Then why continue to tell lies?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The one irrefutable fact
>>>>>> is that he's an asshole.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>No, that's an opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Scott Wheeler
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> McKelvy has once again been caught lying. He has once again made
>>>> numerous
>>>> false stateements about me, been challenged by two people to put his
>>>> money
>>>> where his lying mouth is, and has come up empty, like the sociopathic
>>>> coward we
>>>> know him to be.
>>>>
>>>> This lying creep was also afraid to call a telephone number and leave
>>>> his
>>>> name
>>>> on my answering machine because he knew that it would provide more
>>>> evidence
>>>> that he could not distort, lie about, or otherwise mischaracterize.
>>>> Since
>>>> a
>>>> tape of both his vocie and mine would have then resulted, he could not
>>>> have
>>>> lied about calling me after the fact. That's why he chickened out when
>>>> he
>>>> was
>>>> confronted.
>>>>
>>>> If I had a dollar for every time McKelvy has been caught lying about me
>>>> (and
>>>> others as well), I'd be extremely wealthy.
>>>
>>>
>If only there were any. Since you've repeatedly failed to produce anything
>other than my sarcastic opinions, one has to conclude you're lying again.
>
>
>

Denial of reality and delusions of truthfulness noted.

Apparently, McKelvy has conveniently forgotten his lengthy history of libel and
character assassination on RAO. Here's just a small example:

In response to proven libeler and pathological liar McKelvy's continued
repetition of false claims, coupled with a laughable "demand" that I produce
evidence that he has a lengthy history of lying and libeling me on RAO, I
decided to call this cretin's pathetic attempts to dodge responsibility for his
despicable behavior with the following response.

A couple of observations, should be added re. my post of April 9, 2004, which
is reproduced below:

1. In the first example of libel by McKelvy which I cite, he initiated libel
thread with the title "Richman's ethical lapses". It is worth noting that he
does not and CAN NOT list any. So obviously, his sole purpose was to libel and
defame another person. I chose to ignore this piece of unprovoked garbage
which he initiated. As did every other RAO poster.

2. As of the time of this writing, 4:00 PM EST on 4/10/04, the proven liar and
libeler Mckelvy has failed to respond directly to the post reproduced below.
It is obvious that his latest bluff/bull**** has been called and he's been
exposed for what most on RAO already have known him to be for a long time - a
hatemongering, bitter, delusional liar and character assassin whose primary
purpose in posting on RAO is to smear others with whatever lies, libelous false
claims and libelous labels of other people his diseased, delusional "mind"
(such as it is in its primitive state) can regurgitate.

3. Proven liar and libeler McKelvy has been challenged to submit his delusional
"complaints" about my professional and ethical behavior (about which he has
admitted he knows nothing - one of the few true things he has ever said) to the
appropriate licensing board in my state. Of course, he has failed to do so,
most likely because he knows that he's full of it, and will be sued by me after
he does so.

4. I could have provided many more examples of McKelvy's compulsive lies and
libels against me, but felt that for now, 2 would be sufficient. Pending the
results of Mr. Wheeler's case, and in consultation with my attornies, I may
elect to pursue legal action against him and use a quite impressive and lengthy
file of false, libelous claims he has made against me as evidence. No doubt,
he will "help" by continuing to provide further evidence that can be used
against him.

5. I apologize for the lengfh of this post in advance, but in consideration of
McKelvy's obvious compulsive, pathological responses which almost always
consist of further lies and libelous false statements about me, this response
is IMHO, quite appropriate.

6. This response will be the one used in the future to deal with McKelvy's
subsequent sociopathic, delusional, false, and libelous personal attacks
against me.




Mike McKelvy continues to avoid providing proof of his slander:
>>From: (Bruce J. Richman)
>
>>Mike McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>From: (Bruce J. Richman)
>>>
>>
>><deletion of further lies in which McKelvy tries to avoid responsibility for
>>lengthy history of lying and committing slander re. my credentials, training
>>and professional activities.>
>>
>>This despicable scumbag, after first admitting he knows nothing about my
>>credentials, training and professional activities, then laughingly trying to
>>claim his slanderous bull**** was merely opinions, and now attempting to
>deny
>>all responsibility for his ridiculous lies ? insults the intelligence of
>all
>>RAO readers.
>>
>>His requests for "proof" ? like all his imbecilic grunts and mutterings
>>concerning me ? are a joke. As is his very RAO existence.
>>
>>While he continue to deny slandering me, and requesting proof, his
>>credibility
>>remains zero (except perhaps, in the eyes of his hero, Krueger).
>>
>>His false claims re. my professional background are a matter of Google
>>record,
>>and virtually all RAO readers at all familiar with this sociopath's
>imbecilic
>>bull**** re. my background know this to be the case.
>>
>>Since he's been purveying lies about me, he needs to present the proof for
>>all
>>his nonsense, or stick his head further up the orifice in which it's
>>obviously
>>been inserted for so long.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Bruce J. Richman
>>
>

<repetitive bull**** similar to that pruveyed over a 6 year period by this
pathological liar and proven slanderer deleted>

For this pathological liar, all false claims about another person's training,
credentials, professional experience, etc. ? are only "opinions" ? a piece of
bull**** nobody other than this lying cretin believes.

Here's just one example of his slander:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF?8&threadm=vthbp0ffk2j625%
40corp.supernews.com&rnum=7&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DMcKelvy%2Band%2Blicensing%2
Bboard%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26t ab%3Dwg

Note that this was an attack thread started by McKelvy, in which this fool,
reproduces the Ethical Code followed by psychologists.

Note the slanderous title of the post.

Note also the question, this proven slanderer asks in the last line after
quoting the Ethical code.

Needless to say, this pathological liar has no evidence that I have ever
committed any ethics violations, and in fact his use of the title of this
thread, to which nobody responded, constitutes slander.

I have directly challenged this despicable cretin and proven liar to submit any

complaints he has to the Florida State Licensing Board. He has refused to do
so, because he knows he's been lying about me for 6 years.

This fool, in a conversation with Scott Wheeler commiitted another blatant lie:


"The person claiming to be B.J. Richman, a Ph.D is a fake as should be
obvious to anybody with more than 2 active neurons."

The reference for this is
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF?8&selm=vtg1igk0458h89%40c
orp.supernews.com

Now, no doubt, proven liar and slanderer McKelvy will claim he's just voiced an
opinion, but defamation and libel of a licensed psychologist, whose identity is

acknowledged and has been proven on RAO to the satisfaction of virtually all
conscious lifeforms with the exception of McKelvy and Krueger, is *not* an
opinion.

His lies are a matter of public record, and these 2 examples are just a few of
many that could be easily obtained from the Google record.

He has also deliberately ignored the following evidence presented on Google:

"The University of Texas at Austin, has long had one of the most highly
regarded
doctoral programs in Clinical Psychology in the United States (top 10
ranking). Since I had the good fortune to have a very good record in my
Master's propgram at Clinical Psychology at Boston College,l and perhaps
becauise I hit the 99th %ile on the Graduate Record Examination (Verbal
Portion) and the 99th %ile examination on the Psychology Acvhievement section,
I had the rather odd experience of being actively recruited by schools to which
I applied. (I had always thought this just happened to jocks, but I was
wrong). One unforgettable day, I got a call from the head of the Clinical
Psychology program at the University of Texas, a Dr. James Bieri, who basically
said "We've seen your application, we'd like you to come here, and we're
prepared to make you a nice offfer". That nice offer, which I accepted, turned
out to be a NIMH (National Institutes of Mental Health) Traineeship in Clinical
Psychology, for an unlimited period of time, with no strings attached other
than that I meet the academic requirements of the program (maintain a B
average).. It took care of all my expenses (tuition, room & board, books,
etc.) and gave me s small stipend to live on as well. Some of my classmates
congratulated me on my good fortune (many of them had to accept teaching
assistantships to help pay their bills, while all I had to do was hit the
books). The program turned out to be a real meatgrinder (as one of my
classmates put it). It made my undergraduate program at an elite "small Ivy
League school" (Bowdoin College) and my M.A. program seem like kindergarten.
Almost everybody in my entering class of about 20 had either a Phi
Beta Kappa key, was published and or came from Ivy League schools or places
like U. of Chicago, Stanford or Berkeley. Of the 20 who started the program,
only 5 of us survived and got our doctorates. It took not only a high degree
of intelligence and perserverance, but also a large ability to deal with the
stress of knowing that you were in a program with a very high attrition rate
and some professors, who frankly, until you got to the 2nd year and had "paid
your dues", didn't give a damn if you survived or not. I'll never forgot one
of my Statistics professors who used to get up in front of the class and say
"Even if you don't make it through graduate school, you can still be a good
citizen""

and the following:

"I was accepted for an Internship in Clnical
Psycnology at Massachusetts General Hospital, which I accepted and completed"

and the followiong:

"After obtaining my doctorate, I was
also accepted for postdoctoral training at Temple Medical School, Department of
Psychiary, Institute for Behavior Therapy, in Philadelphia. I enjoyed my time
there had learned a lot under the supervision of the late Dr. Joseph Wolpe, a
world famous psychiatrist who is considered to be one of the founders of
Cognitive?Behavioral Therapy, the predominant type of therapy now practiced by
most psychologists and psychiatrists (aside from pharmacotherapy). "

The above quotes are from a post written in response to Howard Ferstler,
another well known zealot, pathological liar, and purveyor of libel on RAO (not
surprisingly, frequently defended by Krueger, McKelvy's role model).

The complete post (and thread) can be referened at:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF?8&selm=20030203225629.076
19.00000418%40mb?mg.aol.com&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DFerstler%2Band%2BRichman%2B
and%2BUniversity%2Bof%2BTexas%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26 ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26ta
b%3Dwg

So McKelvy's slandeous claims about quacks, frauds, and fakes are nothing more
than the delusional, sociopathic rantings and repetitions of a proven liar and
libeler.

No doubt he will claim that this is all made up, but the only thing made up are
his nonsensical departures from reality which pollute RAO whenever he continues
to libel me and others.

One further fact, which I may or may not be able to prove since it happened a
long time ago, and I don't know if the radio station keeps records. And I
challenge the cretin and liar, McKelvy, to disprove it ? LOL! :

In about 1976 or 1977, I was employed as the "Psychology Director" of a private
Cardiac Rehabilitation Center based in Miami, Florida. The center ran a
30?day, interdisciplinary inpatient program for patients who were either at
high risk for cardiac disease or had already undergone such procedures as
cardiac bypass surgery. My main responsibility was to direct the behavioral
component of this intensive program (which also involved dieticians, exercise
physiologists, cardiologists, and RNs). Areas such as stress management,

smoking cessation, behavioral approaches to obesity, etc. were among the
targets that I had to address. One of my other responsibilities was, in
conjunction with the medical director, to promote the program through various
media appearances in both TV and radio. Two interviews in particular stand out
in my mind. The first came in the wee hours of the morning in New York City on
a nationally syndicated program ? "The Long John Nebel Show" (New Yorkers old
enough may remember this). The second occurred in my home base on the 79th
Street Causeway in Miami Beach at a radio station where Miami's best known talk
show host (at the time) was carrying forth ? I spent 2 hours being interviewed
very incisively on the main topic which was "Stress and Heart Disease". I
remember coming away from that interview thinking that the interviewer was very
sharp and well prepared to really grill me. The name of the radio station (and
I'm relying on long ago recall was, I believe either WKAT or WIOD). The name
of the host ? Larry King.

Shortly thereafter, Larry left Miami and the rest is history.

I challenge the proven liar, and libeler, McKelvy to dispute any of these facts
with any factual evidence he cares to fabricate from the diseased empty spaces
composing his deluded cranium.

No doubt he will choose to delete most of this post instead.

LOL!!!

(I apologize for appearing to be bragging about past or present
accomplishments, but since this despicable, loudmouthed, unbelievably stupid,
delusional, libeler and liar decided to completely embarass himself once again,
it was just too tempting to not assist him in making a fool of himself and
exposing his sociopathic behavior once again).

Nothing more needs to be said about his lies, so when he responds with more
bull****, I will respond with a standard, previously used, canned response that
perfectly describes this moron's basic character, motivations, and irrational
behaviors.

Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
(FL PY 2543)

-----------------------------------------------------------

Nobody but McKelvy (other than perhaps Krueger or Lionel) believes his obvious
liesa about me are either sarcasm or opinions. Especially when concrete
evidence has been repeatedly presented to disprove his bull****.



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Dave Weil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:26:08 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I just showed in another post that even being extremely generous,
>>>>>>McKelvey
>>>>>>has only been posting here in any volume for 5 years.
>>>>>
>>>>>AFAIK, "McKelvey" hasn't posted at RAO in any significant volume at
>>>>>all during ANY period of time.
>>>>>
>>>>>So, another "lie" by Mr. Krueger exposed for all to see...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely. How hypocritical that Krueger, who has also posted in the
>>>> past
>>>> under "Kruger" and other names would try and sell this latest pile of
>>>> Krueger-customized bull**** to RAO.
>>>>
>>>> McKelvy also posted under the name, "Mikeylikst" at one time, so
>>>> Krueger's
>>>> obvious and rather pathetic attempts to reinvent history are laughable.
>>>>
>>>> LOL !!!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (I guess "Goggle" was lying to him again).
>>>>
>>>> (snicker)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I guess you missed the post where he got the spelling correct.
>>>
>>
>> I guess you forgot to correct him and admit that he lied in his original
>> post.
>> Probably both.
>>
>He'd already made the correction before I mentioned it.
>
>

He only made it after being exposed for his deceptive statisitics reporting by
both Dave Weil and myself. He made one of his typically stupid attempts to
pull a scam using bogus statistics and got caught. Just like you've been
caught over and over again lying about me and others.


>
>>>You are still a liar or a delusional twit. Probably both.
>>>
>>
>> And you're a gutless liar who makes bets and then chickens out when
>> challenged
>> to put up or shut up.
>>
>What bet is that?
>

Short-term memory problems and stupidity noted. Scott Wheeler offered to meet
your bet claiming that I was not whom I've claimed to be - and I offered to
match that bet with the same 5:1 odds.



>> You're also a lying sack of **** and a delusional scumbag.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Prove it.
>

Asked and answered. Many times over the years.



Bruce J. Richman

[Michael McKelvy]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
>> >> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > Arny Krueger wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>> >> >>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on
> about
>> >> >>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make
>> > the
>> >> >>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to
>> > batter
>> >> >>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from
>> > him. This
>> >> >>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact
>> > Roy
>> >> >>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would
>> > capitalize on
>> >> >>it
>> >> >>every way he could.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>I made it because Arnii
>> >> >>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I
>> > wanted
>> >> >>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes
>> > preparation - you
>> >> >>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However,
> Roy's
>> > only
>> >> >>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the
> conversation.
>> > If this
>> >> >>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the
>> > phone,
>> >> >>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but
>> > did catch
>> >> >>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false
> claims
>> > about
>> >> > Roy's
>> >> > sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate
> that
>> > Roy is
>> >> > at all
>> >> > inebriated.
>> >>
>> >> And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to
>> > know
>> >> whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny
>> > thought it.
>> >>
>> >> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share
> in
>> >> > this assessment.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody
>> > named
>> >> Richman.
>> >> >
>> >
>> > You are lying again. I already offered to take that bet and you
> backed
>> > out. I'll offer it again. I'll bet 5,000 dollars to your 1,000
> dollars
>> > that the person posting as Dr. Richman is Dr. Richman, a licenced
>> > psychologist. That's 5 to 1 odds Mikey. If you "would bet that he
> is
>> > stark raving mad pretending to be somebody named Richman" here is
> your
>> > chance. I say you are lying. Take the bet or admit you are lying.
>> > Scott Wheeler
>> >
>> When are you going to get it?
>
> I get it. you lie and deny it. If you weren't lying you would take the
> bet as you claimed you would.
>
>
> I don't give a **** who he is.
>
>
> Irrelevant. You offered to make a bet and now you are backing out. You
> lied.
>
>
>
> I've already
>> said I take JJ's word for it hat he is who he is.
>
>
>
>
> Then why continue to tell lies?
>
It was sarcasm.
>
>
> The one irrefutable fact
>> is that he's an asshole.
>
>
>
>

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>
>>>>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>>>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>>>>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>>>>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>
>>>>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him.
>>>>This
>>>>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
>>>>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would capitalize
>>>>on
>>>>it
>>>>every way he could.
>>>>
>>>>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>>>>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>
>>>>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation -
>>>>you
>>>>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's only
>>>>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If
>>>>this
>>>>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
>>>>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did
>>>>catch
>>>>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>>> about
>>> Roy's
>>> sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that Roy is
>>> at all
>>> inebriated.
>>
>>And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to know
>>whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny thought it.
>>
>
> As usual, your srtupidity is quick to surface. Krueger mentioned in this
> very
> thread that Roy was drunk when he called him. Thanks for demonstrating
> your
> willingness to lie about Krueger again.
>
He said his daughter din't understand Roy's drunken blathering. I took that
to mean she thought he was drunk.

>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>> this assessment.
>>>
Wow, what more could anyone ask for in the honesty department. :-(
>>
>>I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody named
>>Richman.
>>>
>
> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose delusions
> have
> polluted RAO for many years.
>
> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic lapdog.
>
>
>
>
Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack of
creative thinking.

[Michael McKelvy]

"The Roy Brigg's" > wrote in message
news:e4g2015gfbak4lajvfnhaulb5fmcmdq0su@rdmzrnewst xt.nz...
> On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:53:21 -0500, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
>>I went back and redid the work. I had used McKelvy in most or all of the
>>searches, but I had not picked up your use of Mickeylikst.
>>
>>Bottom line is the same - Richman's claim that you have been libeling him
>>for almost 7 years is at best hyperbole. He seems to really like that 7
>>year
>>number!
>
> Why are you lying again? You told me (and I've got it recorded) that
> you thought Mikey was dumb and ignorant but was going along the right
> lines when it came to audio, which is why you threw him the occasional
> crumb of encouragement. Don't be two-faced about it, Arnii, otherwise
> I will send Mikey that part of the recording.
>
> --
If it exists, send it to me. You're far enough away that even if I wanted
to report you to the authorities, it wouldn't matter. Besides, as I
understand it such recordings are legal if one of the people being recorded
knows about it.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Roy wrote:
>
>
>
> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
> differences,
> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not about
what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest in
DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.

> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
> whenever one
> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>
> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>
And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>
>
> Bruce J. Richman: A 7 year history of making Usenet more Delusional.

[[email protected]]

Michael McKelvy wrote to the AutoRepeatQuack:
>
>
>We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>
>

"We hold certain truths to be self evident." ;-)

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>>>>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>>>>>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>>>>>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>>
>>>>>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him.
>>>>>This
>>>>>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
>>>>>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would capitalize
>>>>>on
>>>>>it
>>>>>every way he could.
>>>>>
>>>>>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>>>>>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>>
>>>>>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation -
>>>>>you
>>>>>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's only
>>>>>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If
>>>>>this
>>>>>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
>>>>>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did
>>>>>catch
>>>>>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>>>> about
>>>> Roy's
>>>> sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that Roy is
>>>> at all
>>>> inebriated.
>>>
>>>And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to know
>>>whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny thought it.
>>>
>>
>> As usual, your srtupidity is quick to surface. Krueger mentioned in this
>> very
>> thread that Roy was drunk when he called him. Thanks for demonstrating
>> your
>> willingness to lie about Krueger again.
>>
>He said his daughter din't understand Roy's drunken blathering. I took that
>to mean she thought he was drunk.
>
>
Therefore, you're contradicting your pathetic attempts to flame me when I said
that I heard no evidence of Rot being drunk on the tape. I've heard the tape,
but I assume you haven't, and therefore, your statements about it carry the
typical stupidity for which you are known.


>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>>> this assessment.
>>>>
>Wow, what more could anyone ask for in the honesty department. :-(
>>>
>>>I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody named
>>>Richman.
>>>>
>>
>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose delusions
>> have
>> polluted RAO for many years.
>>
>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic lapdog.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack of
>creative thinking.
>
>
>

As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing and strive for the last word in the
latest flame war he started. This is typical for this brain-dead moron.


Bruce J. Richman

[Arny Krueger]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>> ...

>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>> lapdog.

>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>> of creative thinking.

> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing

So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain death?

>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.

The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread before
McKelvy did.

> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.

This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?

LOL!

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Roy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>> differences,
>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>
>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not about
>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest in
>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>
>

Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to? Would that be the
voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?

And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO agrees that
you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.




> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>> whenever one
>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>
>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>
>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>

Prove that you can count to 7, duh--Mikey. And since we all know where your
head is usually inserted, you won't be able to use your fingers or toes as
visual aids to help you.




>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of contact
with reality on RAO since 1996.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Arny Krueger wrote:

>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>
>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>> lapdog.
>
>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>>> of creative thinking.
>
>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>
>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain death?
>
>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>
>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread before
>McKelvy did.

The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal attack
against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no provocation
directed at him.;
\
Krueger is therefore, just lying again.



>
>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>
>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>
>LOL!
>
>
>

Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above, an
auto-repeat Liar.

LOL !!!


Bruce J. Richman

[[email protected]]

AutoRepeatQuack has a Quackathon:
>
> Denial of reality
> delusions
> libel
> character assassination
> proven libeler
> pathological liar
> lying
> libeling
> libel
> libel
> defame
> proven liar
> libeler
> delusional
> liar
> character assassin
> lies,
> libelous
> libelous
> delusional "mind"
> liar
> libeler
> delusional
> lies
> libels
> libelous
>
>
<remaider of Quackathon deleted>

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Roy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>> differences,
>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>
>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not
>>about
>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest in
>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>
>>
>
> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to? Would that be
> the
> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>
> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO agrees
> that
> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>
Prove it.
>
>
>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>> whenever one
>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>
>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>
>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>
>
> Prove that you can count to 7,

What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.

>
>
>
>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>> contact
> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Lack of orignality noted.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Roy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>>> differences,
>>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>>
>>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not
>>>about
>>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest in
>>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to? Would that be
>> the
>> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>>
>> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO agrees
>> that
>> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>>
>Prove it.
>>
>>
>>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>>> whenever one
>>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>>
>>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>>
>>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>>
>>
>> Prove that you can count to 7,
>
>What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.
>

Pretensions of mind-reading noted.



>
>>
>>
>>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>>> contact
>> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>Lack of orignality noted.
>
>

Failure to accept responsibility for initial forgeries noted.



Bruce J. Richman

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"The Devil" > wrote in message
>>>>>>news:iauvv0tg7d7v4qvgail3fhqspc0gjr4t76@rdmzrnewst xt.nz
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would be really, really grateful if people didn't keep on about
>>>>>>> this. Despite what has been said here recently, I did not make the
>>>>>>> recording to be distributed among RAO folks or to be used to batter
>>>>>>> Arnii over the head at every opportunity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So someone with a gun pointed it at Roy's head and stole it from him.
>>>>>>This
>>>>>>is the only way that this statement could be meaningful. In fact Roy
>>>>>>gleefully distributed to Middius in the hopes that he would capitalize
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>it
>>>>>>every way he could.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I made it because Arnii
>>>>>>> accused me of abusing his daughter--which I did not do--and I wanted
>>>>>>> him to admit it, which he does in a roundabout way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This is an illogical lie. To make a tape like this takes preparation -
>>>>>>you
>>>>>>can't make the tape after the conversation is over. However, Roy's
>>>>>>only
>>>>>>contact with my daughter was at the beginning at the conversation. If
>>>>>>this
>>>>>>is the conversation I'm thinking of, my daughter answered the phone,
>>>>>>couldn't make heads or tales out of Roy's drunken blathering but did
>>>>>>catch
>>>>>>my name, and handed the phone off to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Speaking of lies, Krueger is making another one of his false claims
>>>>> about
>>>>> Roy's
>>>>> sobriety here. There is no evidence on the tape to indicate that Roy
>>>>> is
>>>>> at all
>>>>> inebriated.
>>>>
>>>>And there's no evidence that you ar a mind reader and are able to know
>>>>whether or not Arny's daughter thought he was drunk or if Arny thought
>>>>it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As usual, your srtupidity is quick to surface. Krueger mentioned in
>>> this
>>> very
>>> thread that Roy was drunk when he called him. Thanks for demonstrating
>>> your
>>> willingness to lie about Krueger again.
>>>
>>He said his daughter din't understand Roy's drunken blathering. I took
>>that
>>to mean she thought he was drunk.
>>
>>
> Therefore, you're contradicting your pathetic attempts to flame me when I
> said
> that I heard no evidence of Rot being drunk on the tape.

Little Freudian slip there?

I would not excpect you to thell the truth, either that or you stay blind
druk yourself.

I've heard the tape,
> but I assume you haven't, and therefore, your statements about it carry
> the
> typical stupidity for which you are known.
>
I wasn't commenting on the tape nly the possibilty of different
interpretation.
You shuold know about such things, since black is white in Richman world.
>
>>> I would bet that all of us that have heard the tape would share in
>>>>> this assessment.
>>>>>
>>Wow, what more could anyone ask for in the honesty department. :-(
>>>>
>>>>I would bet you're stark raving mad and pretending to be somebody named
>>>>Richman.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> And most of RAO knows that you're a lying sack of **** whose delusions
>>> have
>>> polluted RAO for many years.
>>>
>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic lapdog.
>>>
>>>
Just another response to Qucakenbush's constant derision and bull****.


>>Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack of
>>creative thinking.
>>
>>
>>
>
> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing and strive for the last word
> in the
> latest flame war he started. This is typical for this brain-dead moron.

I just like making fun of you.

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> Roy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>>>> differences,
>>>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>>>
>>>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not
>>>>about
>>>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest
>>>>in
>>>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to? Would that be
>>> the
>>> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>>>
>>> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO
>>> agrees
>>> that
>>> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>>>
>>Prove it.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>>>> whenever one
>>>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>>>
>>>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Prove that you can count to 7,
>>
>>What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.
>>
>
> Pretensions of mind-reading noted.
>
Not mind reading, a reasonable prediction, based on past experience.
>
> >
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>>>> contact
>>> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>Lack of orignality noted.
>>
>>
>
> Failure to accept responsibility for initial forgeries noted.
>
>
>
Riiight. It was a big secret that I'm sure confused the hell out of many of
your buddies. :-(

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>
>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>> lapdog.
>>
>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>>>> of creative thinking.
>>
>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>
>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain death?
>>
>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>
>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread before
>>McKelvy did.
>
> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal attack
> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no provocation
> directed at him.;
>
I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad, wrong,
over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.

You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the Julian
Hirsch RIP thread.


> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>
IOW, you've been caught again.
>
>>
>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>
>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>
>>LOL!
>>
>>
>>
>
> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above, an
> auto-repeat Liar.
>
IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> Roy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>>>>> differences,
>>>>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>>>>
>>>>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not
>>>>>about
>>>>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest
>>>>>in
>>>>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to? Would that be
>>>> the
>>>> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>>>>
>>>> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO
>>>> agrees
>>>> that
>>>> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>>>>
>>>Prove it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>>>>> whenever one
>>>>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Prove that you can count to 7,
>>>
>>>What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.
>>>
>>
>> Pretensions of mind-reading noted.
>>
>Not mind reading, a reasonable prediction, based on past experience.
>>
>

Bull****. It was just another lie, similar to many you've told in the past.


> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>>>>> contact
>>>> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>Lack of orignality noted.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Failure to accept responsibility for initial forgeries noted.
>>
>>
>>
>Riiight. It was a big secret that I'm sure confused the hell out of many of
>your buddies. :-(
>
>

Prove it.
Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

duh-Mikey wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>
>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>
>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>
>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>
>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain death?
>>>
>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>
>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread before
>>>McKelvy did.
>>
>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal attack
>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no provocation
>> directed at him.;
>>
>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad, wrong,
>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.

duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked personal attack in
which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now trying to
rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.

It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of Krueger,
Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his many enemies


>
>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the Julian
>Hirsch RIP thread.
>
>
>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>
>IOW, you've been caught again.
>

McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality and severe
cognitive limitations.

>>
>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>
>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>
>>>LOL!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above, an
>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>
>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>
>
>
>

duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical idiot.



Bruce J. Richman

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>> Roy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>>>>>> differences,
>>>>>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not
>>>>>>about
>>>>>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest
>>>>>>in
>>>>>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to?

Those who don't subscribe to the Arny is the root of all evil school of
thought. The smarter ones.

Would that be
>>>>> the
>>>>> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>>>>>
>>>>> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO
>>>>> agrees
>>>>> that
>>>>> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>>>>>
>>>>Prove it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>>>>>> whenever one
>>>>>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Prove that you can count to 7,
>>>>
>>>>What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Pretensions of mind-reading noted.
>>>
>>Not mind reading, a reasonable prediction, based on past experience.
>>>
>>
>
> Bull****. It was just another lie, similar to many you've told in the
> past.
>

I know Bruce any opinion you dislike is a lie. That's one of those
predictable things we love about you.
>
>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>>>>>> contact
>>>>> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>Lack of orignality noted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Failure to accept responsibility for initial forgeries noted.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Riiight. It was a big secret that I'm sure confused the hell out of many
>>of
>>your buddies. :-(
>>
>>
>
> Prove it.


Idiotic response noted.
>
>
>

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> duh-Mikey wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>
>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>>
>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>>
>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain
>>>>death?
>>>>
>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>>
>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread
>>>>before
>>>>McKelvy did.
>>>
>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal
>>> attack
>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no
>>> provocation
>>> directed at him.;
>>>
>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad, wrong,
>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
>
> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked personal
> attack in
> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now trying to
> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
>
> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of Krueger,
> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his many
> enemies
>
>
>>
>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the Julian
>>Hirsch RIP thread.
>>
>>
>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>>
>>IOW, you've been caught again.
>>
>
> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality and
> severe
> cognitive limitations.
>
>>>
>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>>
>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>>
>>>>LOL!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above, an
>>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>>
>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical idiot.
>
>
>
OSAF. Again.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>
>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>>> Roy wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>>>>>>> differences,
>>>>>>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm not
>>>>>>>about
>>>>>>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an interest
>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to?
>
>Those who don't subscribe to the Arny is the root of all evil school of
>thought. The smarter ones.
>

False claim noted. Lack of evidence also noted. McKelvy's prresence among
those he calls "we" also contradicts his false assertion.



> Would that be
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO
>>>>>> agrees
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Prove it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>>>>>>> whenever one
>>>>>>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Prove that you can count to 7,
>>>>>
>>>>>What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pretensions of mind-reading noted.
>>>>
>>>Not mind reading, a reasonable prediction, based on past experience.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> Bull****. It was just another lie, similar to many you've told in the
>> past.
>>
>
>I know Bruce any opinion you dislike is a lie. That's one of those
>predictable things we love about you.

Another false claim with no evidence to support it. We (those that know better
than to believe the constant stream of bull**** spewed by you, Krueger, &
Lionel) know that you claim all your lies are just "opinions'". Your constant
denials of deliberately lying are one of many things that we detest about you.


>>
>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>>>>>>> contact
>>>>>> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>Lack of orignality noted.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Failure to accept responsibility for initial forgeries noted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Riiight. It was a big secret that I'm sure confused the hell out of many
>>>of
>>>your buddies. :-(
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Prove it.
>
>
>Idiotic response noted.
>>
>>

A very accurate description of both Krueger's use of that term and yours
(imitating him in admiration, no doubt). Any Google search for the use of
these 2 words will find Kruegrer using it more than anybody else, and not in an
appropriate or relevant way.






Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> duh-Mikey wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>>>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>>>
>>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>>>
>>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain
>>>>>death?
>>>>>
>>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>>>
>>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread
>>>>>before
>>>>>McKelvy did.
>>>>
>>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal
>>>> attack
>>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no
>>>> provocation
>>>> directed at him.;
>>>>
>>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad, wrong,
>>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
>>
>> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked personal
>> attack in
>> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now trying to
>> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
>>
>> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of Krueger,
>> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his many
>> enemies
>>
>>
>>>
>>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the Julian
>>>Hirsch RIP thread.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>>>
>>>IOW, you've been caught again.
>>>
>>
>> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality and
>> severe
>> cognitive limitations.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>>>
>>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>>>
>>>>>LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above, an
>>>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>>>
>>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical idiot.
>>
>>
>>
>OSAF. Again.
>
>

Meaningless, robotic response, again.



Bruce J. Richman

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>>>> Roy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>>>>>>>> differences,
>>>>>>>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm
>>>>>>>>not
>>>>>>>>about
>>>>>>>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an
>>>>>>>>interest
>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to?
>>
>>Those who don't subscribe to the Arny is the root of all evil school of
>>thought. The smarter ones.
>>
>
> False claim noted. Lack of evidence also noted. McKelvy's prresence
> among
> those he calls "we" also contradicts his false assertion.
>
>
>
>> Would that be
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO
>>>>>>> agrees
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Prove it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>>>>>>>> whenever one
>>>>>>>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Prove that you can count to 7,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pretensions of mind-reading noted.
>>>>>
>>>>Not mind reading, a reasonable prediction, based on past experience.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Bull****. It was just another lie, similar to many you've told in the
>>> past.
>>>
>>
>>I know Bruce any opinion you dislike is a lie. That's one of those
>>predictable things we love about you.
>
> Another false claim with no evidence to support it. We (those that know
> better
> than to believe the constant stream of bull**** spewed by you, Krueger, &
> Lionel) know that you claim all your lies are just "opinions'". Your
> constant
> denials of deliberately lying are one of many things that we detest about
> you.
>
>
>>>
>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>>>>>>>> contact
>>>>>>> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Lack of orignality noted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Failure to accept responsibility for initial forgeries noted.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Riiight. It was a big secret that I'm sure confused the hell out of
>>>>many
>>>>of
>>>>your buddies. :-(
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Prove it.
>>
>>
>>Idiotic response noted.
>>>
>>>
>
> A very accurate description of both Krueger's use of that term and yours
> (imitating him in admiration, no doubt). Any Google search for the use of
> these 2 words will find Kruegrer using it more than anybody else, and not
> in an
> appropriate or relevant way.
>
>
So what? I'm sure a search for sociopathic or delusional would show you use
those words more than anyone else here, usually about people you have no
direct knowledge of.

It was an accurate description.
>
>
>

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> duh-Mikey wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>>>>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain
>>>>>>death?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread
>>>>>>before
>>>>>>McKelvy did.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal
>>>>> attack
>>>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no
>>>>> provocation
>>>>> directed at him.;
>>>>>
>>>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad, wrong,
>>>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
>>>
>>> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked personal
>>> attack in
>>> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now trying to
>>> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
>>>
>>> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of Krueger,
>>> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his many
>>> enemies
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the
>>>>Julian
>>>>Hirsch RIP thread.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>>>>
>>>>IOW, you've been caught again.
>>>>
>>>
>>> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality and
>>> severe
>>> cognitive limitations.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>LOL!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above,
>>>>> an
>>>>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>>>>
>>>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical
>>> idiot.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>OSAF. Again.
>>
>>
>
> Meaningless, robotic response, again.
>
>
>
This from the king of robotic responses. LOL.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>>>>> Roy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Krueger, just like McKelvy and Lionel, like to put aside personal
>>>>>>>>>> differences,
>>>>>>>>>> in favor of the old proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Wrong as usual. We agree on very little other than audio, and I'm
>>>>>>>>>not
>>>>>>>>>about
>>>>>>>>>what Lionel thinks about audio other than he seems to have an
>>>>>>>>>interest
>>>>>>>>>in
>>>>>>>>>DIY projects. We just all agree that you are a pompous windbag.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prove it, asshole. Who is the "we" you're referring to?
>>>
>>>Those who don't subscribe to the Arny is the root of all evil school of
>>>thought. The smarter ones.
>>>
>>
>> False claim noted. Lack of evidence also noted. McKelvy's prresence
>> among
>> those he calls "we" also contradicts his false assertion.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Would that be
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> voices in your head controlling your idiotic blather?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And aside from you, Krueger and Lionel, almost all the rest of RAO
>>>>>>>> agrees
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> you are extremely stupid and a lying piece of ****.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Prove it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Consequently, all 3 of these chronic liars will support each other
>>>>>>>>>> whenever one
>>>>>>>>>> of their many "enemies" is targeted by one of them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They should change their names to Moe, Larry and Curly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>And you guys are the 7 dwarves, with you as Dopey.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prove that you can count to 7,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What for, you would just say I was having delusions of counting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pretensions of mind-reading noted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Not mind reading, a reasonable prediction, based on past experience.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bull****. It was just another lie, similar to many you've told in the
>>>> past.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I know Bruce any opinion you dislike is a lie. That's one of those
>>>predictable things we love about you.
>>
>> Another false claim with no evidence to support it. We (those that know
>> better
>> than to believe the constant stream of bull**** spewed by you, Krueger, &
>> Lionel) know that you claim all your lies are just "opinions'". Your
>> constant
>> denials of deliberately lying are one of many things that we detest about
>> you.
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy -demonstratng both mental retardation and lack of
>>>>>>>>>> contact
>>>>>>>> with reality on RAO since 1996.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Lack of orignality noted.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Failure to accept responsibility for initial forgeries noted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>Riiight. It was a big secret that I'm sure confused the hell out of
>>>>>many
>>>>>of
>>>>>your buddies. :-(
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Prove it.
>>>
>>>
>>>Idiotic response noted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> A very accurate description of both Krueger's use of that term and yours
>> (imitating him in admiration, no doubt). Any Google search for the use of
>> these 2 words will find Kruegrer using it more than anybody else, and not
>> in an
>> appropriate or relevant way.
>>
>>
>So what? I'm sure a search for sociopathic or delusional would show you use
>those words more than anyone else here, usually about people you have no
>direct knowledge of.
>
>It was an accurate description.
>>
>>
>>
>

You'll find Krueger using terms like "delusioonal" as much if not more often
than many other people.

Calls for proof are usually cop outs on RAO, since most of what is said here by
way of personal insults is not provable or disprovable.

If you think "prove it" is an idiotic response, than you're one of Krueger's
favorite responses to other people who disagree with him.


Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote::

>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> duh-Mikey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your lack
>>>>>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain
>>>>>>>death?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread
>>>>>>>before
>>>>>>>McKelvy did.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal
>>>>>> attack
>>>>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no
>>>>>> provocation
>>>>>> directed at him.;
>>>>>>
>>>>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad, wrong,
>>>>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
>>>>
>>>> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked personal
>>>> attack in
>>>> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now trying to
>>>> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
>>>>
>>>> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of Krueger,
>>>> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his many
>>>> enemies
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the
>>>>>Julian
>>>>>Hirsch RIP thread.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>IOW, you've been caught again.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality and
>>>> severe
>>>> cognitive limitations.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>LOL!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above,
>>>>>> an
>>>>>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical
>>>> idiot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>OSAF. Again.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Meaningless, robotic response, again.
>>
>>
>>
>This from the king of robotic responses. LOL.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

That would be you. There is nothing more robotic than copying literally the
words of another person. LOL !!!

And from the compulsive flamer, you, whom always tries to get the last word.
LOL !!!

( silly last word attempt will be forthcoming as predicted)



Bruce J. Richman

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote::
>
>>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> duh-Mikey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your
>>>>>>>>>> lack
>>>>>>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain
>>>>>>>>death?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread
>>>>>>>>before
>>>>>>>>McKelvy did.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal
>>>>>>> attack
>>>>>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no
>>>>>>> provocation
>>>>>>> directed at him.;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad,
>>>>>>wrong,
>>>>>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
>>>>>
>>>>> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked personal
>>>>> attack in
>>>>> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now trying
>>>>> to
>>>>> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of
>>>>> Krueger,
>>>>> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his many
>>>>> enemies
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the
>>>>>>Julian
>>>>>>Hirsch RIP thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>IOW, you've been caught again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality and
>>>>> severe
>>>>> cognitive limitations.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>LOL!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above,
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical
>>>>> idiot.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>OSAF. Again.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Meaningless, robotic response, again.
>>>
Meaningless in the sense that it's trus so you must deny it.
>>>
>>This from the king of robotic responses. LOL.
>>
>>
>
> That would be you. There is nothing more robotic than copying literally
> the
> words of another person. LOL !!!
>
There's you posting the same denial that you didn't read something when you
rspond to it. Robots can only say what they're programmed for. I choose my
words according to the situation.

> And from the compulsive flamer, you, whom always tries to get the last
> word.
> LOL !!!
>
False assertion noted.

> ( silly last word attempt will be forthcoming as predicted)
>
>
>
Yes, I'm sure that's what you will do.

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>> Michael McKelvy wrote::
>>
>>>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>> duh-Mikey wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your
>>>>>>>>>>> lack
>>>>>>>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain
>>>>>>>>>death?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread
>>>>>>>>>before
>>>>>>>>>McKelvy did.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal
>>>>>>>> attack
>>>>>>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no
>>>>>>>> provocation
>>>>>>>> directed at him.;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad,
>>>>>>>wrong,
>>>>>>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked personal
>>>>>> attack in
>>>>>> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now trying
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of
>>>>>> Krueger,
>>>>>> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his many
>>>>>> enemies
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the
>>>>>>>Julian
>>>>>>>Hirsch RIP thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>IOW, you've been caught again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality and
>>>>>> severe
>>>>>> cognitive limitations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>LOL!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim above,
>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical
>>>>>> idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>OSAF. Again.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Meaningless, robotic response, again.
>>>>
>Meaningless in the sense that it's trus so you must deny it.

That's just another one of your lies. There is practically nothing that you
have ever said about me that is true. You constantly deny having deliberately
lied about me, even though most of those who have commented know otherwise.

>>>>
>>>This from the king of robotic responses. LOL.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That would be you. There is nothing more robotic than copying literally
>> the
>> words of another person. LOL !!!
>>
>There's you posting the same denial that you didn't read something when you
>rspond to it.

Because it's often the case. It doesn't require reading beyond the first line
to know that when you respond to me, the post will always contain insults,
since you're incapable of engaging in rational conversation without resorting
to name-calling and/or other smears.



Robots can only say what they're programmed for. I choose my
>words according to the situation.
>

So do I.





>> And from the compulsive flamer, you, whom always tries to get the last
>> word.
>> LOL !!!
>>
>False assertion noted.

Another false statement of yours noted.


>
>> ( silly last word attempt will be forthcoming as predicted)
>>
>>
>>
>Yes, I'm sure that's what you will do.
>
>
>

You mean the way you just did? LOL !!!!

Attempt at fortune-telling not supported by evidence noted.

Thanks for proving how predictable you are and will continue to be.


!
Bruce J. Richman

[Sander deWaal]

(Bruce J. Richman) said:

>>> ( silly last word attempt will be forthcoming as predicted)

>>Yes, I'm sure that's what you will do.

>You mean the way you just did? LOL !!!!


Guys, puhleeeeze! *

Let me have the last word here and be done with it, OK? :-)


* think about it: every word you both post is recorded for years to
come in Google...............

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

[Sander deWaal]

George M. Middius > said:

>> * think about it: every word you both post is recorded for years to
>> come in Google...............

>Unless you go back and "nuke" an article you posted and subsequently
>regret. I believe there's one RAO regular who has been "selectively
>editing" his Usenet oeuvre in that fashion.


They say that it can be done, but think of the enormous task that lies
in front of this and some other posters .

Talk about a "usenet career". More like a 24/7 job to me (-:

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

[Michael McKelvy]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>
>
>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>> Michael McKelvy wrote::
>>>
>>>>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>> duh-Mikey wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message

>>>>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's idiotic
>>>>>>>>>>>>> lapdog.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that show your
>>>>>>>>>>>> lack
>>>>>>>>>>>> of creative thinking.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication of brain
>>>>>>>>>>death?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he started.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this thread
>>>>>>>>>>before
>>>>>>>>>>McKelvy did.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a personal
>>>>>>>>> attack
>>>>>>>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been no
>>>>>>>>> provocation
>>>>>>>>> directed at him.;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is bad,
>>>>>>>>wrong,
>>>>>>>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked
>>>>>>> personal
>>>>>>> attack in
>>>>>>> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is now
>>>>>>> trying
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions of
>>>>>>> Krueger,
>>>>>>> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear his
>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>> enemies
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials, like the
>>>>>>>>Julian
>>>>>>>>Hirsch RIP thread.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>IOW, you've been caught again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with reality
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> severe
>>>>>>> cognitive limitations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>LOL!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false claim
>>>>>>>>> above,
>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>> auto-repeat Liar.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying, hypocritical
>>>>>>> idiot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>OSAF. Again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Meaningless, robotic response, again.
>>>>>
>>Meaningless in the sense that it's trus so you must deny it.
>
> That's just another one of your lies. There is practically nothing that
> you
> have ever said about me that is true. You constantly deny having
> deliberately
> lied about me, even though most of those who have commented know
> otherwise.
>
>>>>>
>>>>This from the king of robotic responses. LOL.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That would be you. There is nothing more robotic than copying literally
>>> the
>>> words of another person. LOL !!!
>>>
>>There's you posting the same denial that you didn't read something when
>>you
>>rspond to it.
>
> Because it's often the case. It doesn't require reading beyond the first
> line
> to know that when you respond to me, the post will always contain insults,
> since you're incapable of engaging in rational conversation without
> resorting
> to name-calling and/or other smears.
>
An obvious lie.

I've even posted replies to you that weren't smears. I currently in a
conversation with JBORG that doesn't involve any smears or insults from me.
>
> Robots can only say what they're programmed for. I choose my
>>words according to the situation.
>>
>
> So do I.
>
Then you obviously don't undersand thesituations you respond to.
>
>
>
>>> And from the compulsive flamer, you, whom always tries to get the last
>>> word.
>>> LOL !!!
>>>
>>False assertion noted.
>
> Another false statement of yours noted.
>
I'm not a compulsive flamer. Saying that I am makes you a liar.
>>
>>
>>

[Bruce J. Richman]

Michael McKelvy wrote:


> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Michael McKelvy wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>> Michael McKelvy wrote::
> >>>
> >>>>Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>>>>> duh-Mikey wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>>>>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Michael McKelvy wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just another unprovoked personal attack from Krueger's
idiotic
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> lapdog.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Just another of the auto repeat type statements that
show your
> >>>>>>>>>>>> lack
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of creative thinking.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> As usual, McKelvy has to parrot my phrasing
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>So in Richman Land, a little poetic license is indication
of brain
> >>>>>>>>>>death?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>and strive for the last word in the latest flame war he
started.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>The google record shows that Richman posted a flame to this
thread
> >>>>>>>>>>before
> >>>>>>>>>>McKelvy did.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The Google recrod clearly indicates that McKelvy posted a
personal
> >>>>>>>>> attack
> >>>>>>>>> against Richman in this thread, even though there had been
no
> >>>>>>>>> provocation
> >>>>>>>>> directed at him.;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>I sometimes speak out and criticize behavior that I think is
bad,
> >>>>>>>>wrong,
> >>>>>>>>over the top, mean, or just stupid. Sue me.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> duh-Mikey's been caught once again engaging in an unprovoked
> >>>>>>> personal
> >>>>>>> attack in
> >>>>>>> which his name was never mentioned. This chronic liar is
now
> >>>>>>> trying
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> rationalzie his obnoxious behavior.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It's worth noting that McKelvy doesn't criticize the actions
of
> >>>>>>> Krueger,
> >>>>>>> Lionel, Tor or a few other sockpuppets as long as they smear
his
> >>>>>>> many
> >>>>>>> enemies
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>You post attacks in threads are simple, polite memorials,
like the
> >>>>>>>>Julian
> >>>>>>>>Hirsch RIP thread.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Krueger is therefore, just lying again.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>IOW, you've been caught again.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> McStupid once again demonstrates his lack of contact with
reality
> >>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>> severe
> >>>>>>> cognitive limitations.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> This is typical for this brain-dead moron.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>This makes Richman a what, autorepeat-normal?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>LOL!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Krueger is, by repeated demonstrations, as in the false
claim
> >>>>>>>>> above,
> >>>>>>>>> an
> >>>>>>>>> auto-repeat Liar.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>IOW, Quackenbush was caught again.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> duh-Mikey the Moron has been exposed again as a lying,
hypocritical
> >>>>>>> idiot.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>OSAF. Again.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Meaningless, robotic response, again.
> >>>>>
> >>Meaningless in the sense that it's trus so you must deny it.
> >
> > That's just another one of your lies. There is practically nothing
that
> > you
> > have ever said about me that is true. You constantly deny having
> > deliberately
> > lied about me, even though most of those who have commented know
> > otherwise.
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>This from the king of robotic responses. LOL.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> That would be you. There is nothing more robotic than copying
literally
> >>> the
> >>> words of another person. LOL !!!
> >>>
> >>There's you posting the same denial that you didn't read something
when
> >>you
> >>rspond to it.
> >
> > Because it's often the case. It doesn't require reading beyond the
first
> > line
> > to know that when you respond to me, the post will always contain
insults,
> > since you're incapable of engaging in rational conversation without

> > resorting
> > to name-calling and/or other smears.
> >
> An obvious lie.
>

The only one lying here is yourself. You have no way of knowing
whether or not I have read something, unless you deceptively claim to
be mind-reading, which would be another of your lies.

As previously stated, since your behavior is entirely predictable re.
any responses to me - just like this attempt to once again have the
last word with more insults - I don't need to read your responses to me
to know that they will contain insults.

This post is yet anopther example of your typical response to anything
I write.




> I've even posted replies to you that weren't smears.

Prove it.

I currently in a
> conversation with JBORG that doesn't involve any smears or insults
from me.
> >

So what? And that's your opinion, which may not be his. Also, I have
conversations many times with RAO po9sters that don't involve any
hostilities. I recently had a conversation wtih Howard Ferstler that
involved no personal insults, even though we disagree significantly re.
a number of issues re. double blind testing.


> > Robots can only say what they're programmed for. I choose my
> >>words according to the situation.
> >>
> >
> > So do I.
> >
> Then you obviously don't undersand thesituations you respond to.
> >
>

Now, *that's* an obvious lie of yours and a deliberate personal insult.

Thanks for once again proving my main thesis - you can't engage in
civilized conversation wtih me, and therefore, I have chosen on
occasion to not read your smears and lies about me, but instead to
respond in a method that your insults deserve.


>
> >
> >>> And from the compulsive flamer, you, whom always tries to get
the last
> >>> word.
> >>> LOL !!!
> >>>
> >>False assertion noted.
> >
> > Another false statement of yours noted.
> >
> I'm not a compulsive flamer. Saying that I am makes you a liar.
> >>
> >>
> >>

The only one lying here would be you. When it comes to responses to
Bruce Richman, you are indeed a compulsive flamer. To claim you are
not makes you a liar.

It was just a matter ot time before you would once again attempt to
get the last word (or rather the last insult) in a thread entitled "THE
TAPE". By doing so, even after a few days delay, you once again have
demonstrated your compulsive need to generate more personal insults.

Sander, take note, as to who initiated this latest smear campaign with
yet another predictable insult-filled post.

Q.E.D.

[JBorg]

> Michael McKelvy wrote
>
>
>
>
> I've even posted replies to you that weren't smears. I currently in a
> conversation with JBORG that doesn't involve any smears or insults from me.


Yeah but sometimes you say things to me that makes me want to
smear you like I think yesterday. I don't recall reading BJR of ever
doing that.

[JBorg]

> George M. Middius wrote
>> JBorg said to Mickey:
>
>
>
>> > conversation with JBORG that doesn't involve any smears or insults from
>> > me.
>
>> Yeah but sometimes you say things to me that makes me want to
>> smear you like I think yesterday. I don't recall reading BJR of ever
>> doing that.
>
> Like his role model Arnii F. Krooger, Mickey has a lot of difficulty
> separating a disagreement about ideas from anger and resentment about
> other posters. There's a simple adage about respecting the person while
> attacking the science, but that's a lesson Mickey never learned. You can
> really see his confusion in the truth-versus-lie issue though. Krooger
> lies about everything and everybody, and he believes that as long as he
> keeps arguing about any point, no matter how trivial, then he hasn't been
> caught in a lie. Mickey doesn't even appear to understand the meaning of
> the word "lie", at least judging by his profound confusion about slander,
> lying, and "opinions".


It's interesting that he may not know the meaning of the word "lie".

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message



> Like his role model Arnii F. Krooger, Mickey has a lot of difficulty
> separating a disagreement about ideas from anger and resentment about
> other posters.

As if George Milhouse Middius is in any sense capable of separating a
disagreement about ideas from anger and resentment about
other posters.

>There's a simple adage about respecting the person
> while attacking the science, but that's a lesson Mickey never
> learned.

If Middius would give us even a tiny example of that lesson, it would be a
dramatic first in the history of RAO.

> You can really see his confusion in the truth-versus-lie
> issue though. Krooger lies about everything and everybody, and he
> believes that as long as he keeps arguing about any point, no matter
> how trivial, then he hasn't been caught in a lie.

As opposed to Middius who runs away when challenged on even the most trivial
point.

> Mickey doesn't even
> appear to understand the meaning of the word "lie", at least judging
> by his profound confusion about slander, lying, and "opinions".

As compared to Middius who doesn't seem to understand his own thoughts?

[Ron]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 22:16:09 +0000, The Devil > wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 17:06:27 -0500, George M. Middius
> wrote:
>
>>I wonder if this has anything to do with my computer running a lot slower
>>lately. I'm not asking for a confession, mind you, but you do seem to
>>associate yourself with the Dark Powers of Evil and all that. I've cleaned
>>the hard drive of viruses, spyware, and other parasites, and still I get
>>all this disk-spinning and virtual memorizing. If you have been striking
>>out in anger at my 'puter, message received!
>
>No--but I do have your home address now. And your real name.

By all means, please make it known to a small, selet group of
friends -- like, all r.a.o. readers.

-- Ron