Arny Krueger wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net...

Arny Krueger wrote:


Singh, I don't know how you can attack my family and call yourself a
human.


We're not talking about me, Arny.


No, I'm talking to the wall.


Are you unaware of the differences between the words "to" and "about",
or are you deliberately obfuscating because you're afraid to discuss the
subject at hand?




I'm an atheist, I'm already going to Hell according to your mythology.


Judging by the pained, irrational noises you make Singh, you are
already in
Hell.


Again, this just appears to be you wriggling like a fishie on the end of
a hook. Sad.




We're talking about the mockery you make of your faith.


But Singh you already said that faith is irrational. How can you then use
reason to judge it?



You appear to be putting words in my mouth, Kruegs, because I don't
remember saying anything of the sort. Some very rational men have
faith, I just don't happen to agree with them.


Audio is audio, and fun is fun, but your attacks on my family members

should

be beneath even your vanishingly-small ethics.


Arny, now you're just not being truthful. Suddenly you have rules of
engagement? I think not.


I have very definite rules of engagement. If you were capable of abstract
thinking Singh, I'd invite you to consider what I'd say to you without
some
rules of engagement in force.



Near as I can tell you'd be talking out of your butt cheeks either way.
Can you summarize these rules of engagement, then?

But thanks again for proving that my comments have so much impact on

you,

Singh. Maybe one day you'll learn to have some respect for technology

and

technologists.


Not if they're all dirty birds like you, no.


Singh, I've generally treated you much more gently than others here.


Prove it.


The
first layer of gloves came off only after you attacked my family, and even
then I've been pulling all my figurative punches.



I don't really understand your metaphor. What the flying **** does
"layer of gloves" mean?





And for some reason, every time I bring up the
mockery you've made of your "faith" you don't seem to have a response,


That's yet another lie. I respond, I even quote the Bible.


Sure, with an incorrect interpretation.


Thanks for admitting that you lied, Singh. How do we know when you slip up
and tell the truth?


Lied about what, liar?





Like Atkinson
likes to do, you've confused a response you don't like with no response.


No, I correctly labeled a poorly thought out response as such.


That's not what you said, Singh.


When? Where?


I can't believe you think everybody is so
stupid that they aren't going to back up about 6 lines and read what you
actually said.


Is that six lines with our without your ****ed up line lengths that you
refuse to fix?





even though you have the biggest cyber mouth in the history of Usenet.


Please define "cyber mouth", prove that it fits, and explain why it's a
problem.




How do you explain this?


I feel strongly about telling the truth and do it early and often.


But not all the time?


That isn't what I said.



What did you say? Do you know?




When do we know when you're lying?


You don't. This differs from you Singh, where the more interesting problem
is detecting those rare moments when you slip up and tell the truth.



Another very unChristian utterance. What new?

Probably too early and too often, but hey a guy has to have a little

fun in his life,

no?


If you describe "fun" as not behaving like a Christian, then I guess so.


Letsee Singh, you say that Christianity is mythology (i.e., lies),



"Mythology" means lies? Who knew?


but you
also claim that you're a leading Christianity expert.



Google reference, please.


That makes you an
expert liar, right? But are you lying when you say that?



Say what? Something that you lied about?