Shovels the Mad Parrot of Ramsgate squawks and pecks at dave's eyeballs.


idiocy

your only talent is lying and looking like a trolling fool

Boy, you really are as dumb as you look, aren't you?

I know that, idiot.

You're lying right now.

Lie all you want to Garbage Boy

I can see how much you enjoy playing with yourself.

A "strap" is the thing your mother beat you with.
A "wire" is the thing your father strangled you with and left you for dead
(unfortunately, you were only "brain dead").

little ankle-biting troll

Awwww.... what's the matter widdle Garbage Bag Boy? Did big bad Shippy
hurt widdle Garbage Boy's widdle feewings? Too bad. Seethe and writhe in
your angry pain, for now and forevermore. Good luck at ever getting a life
Garbage Bag Boy.... I know that if I check back in 5 or 10 years from now,
you'll still be the same pathetic trolling fool you are now.

Very persuasive, Shovie. You've definitely put dave in his place. Where
did you learn such advanced reasoning skills?





--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

George M. Mibbius wrote:

Shobels de Mad Parrot of Ramsgate skawks 'n pecks at dabe's eyeballs. idiocy
your on talent is lyigg 'n lookigg like a trolligg fool Boy, you real are as dumbeh as
you look, aren't you, duh...uh...? I know dat, uh, idiot. DOIHH! You're lyigg rite now. Lie all you want t' Garbage Boy I can see duh, how much you endgoy playigg wid
yourself. A "strap" is the, duh uhh, thigg your modeh beat you wid. A "wire" is the, duh uhh, thigg your fadeh stranglid you wid 'n left you f' dead (unf'tunate, you webuhre on "brain dead"). little ankle-bitigg troll Awwww.... what's de matteh wibble Garbage Bag Boy, duh...uh...? Did big bad Shippy hurt wibble Garbage Boy's wibble feewiggs, duh...uh...? Too bad. Seede 'n wride in your angry pain, f' now 'n f'ebehmore. Um
uh.Good luck at ebeh gettigg a life Garbage Bag Boy.... I know dat if I check back in 5 or 10 years from now, uh uh uh uh uh uh, you'll still be the, ERRRR, same padetic
trolligg fool you are now. Behy pehsuasibe, uh uh uh, Shobie. Duh, you'be definite put dabe in his place. Whehe did you learn such adbassd reasonigg skills, duh...uh...?
-- A day widout Kroogeh is like a day widout arsenic.

Yeah yeah, we get it you screeching moron: tongue in cheek humour flies
right past your pointy head. Check your windows, Mumbles. See the black
cardboard covering them up? Tear it down. Go ahead, don't be afraid. I
give you permission to. You can't run, cower and hide from reality all
your life. At some point, the welfare agency is going to get tired of
subsidizing your fantasy life and your pension will buy you a Ritz
cracker a month. And no, RAO is not going to supply you with a pension,
you deluded nutbag. So step away from your computer for a change, open
your windows, step outside, and get over your phobia of fresh air and
get over -yourself-.

Maybe one day you'll find that there really is a "world beyond RAO",
and that no matter what harm it has done to you to leave such a
wretched, pained, miserable individual that we see on our screens every
day, there's is also a good that can come from it. Hiding behind a
computer every day shrieking and bawling out crazy rants like the above
is not doing you or your psyche any good at all.

Here's my free advice to you, little mosquito: Ever seen a baseball?
Buy one, go to the park, maybe some kid will take pity on you and let
you toss it around with him. That in itself will be far more
therapeutic than all the rage, anger and misery you try to vent every
day for the last 10 years on this troller's newsgroup.

On Tue, 16 May 2006 14:42:36 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:

Awwww.... what's the matter widdle Garbage Bag Boy? Did big bad Shippy
hurt widdle Garbage Boy's widdle feewings? Too bad. Seethe and writhe in
your angry pain, for now and forevermore. Good luck at ever getting a life
Garbage Bag Boy.... I know that if I check back in 5 or 10 years from now,
you'll still be the same pathetic trolling fool you are now.

Very persuasive, Shovie. You've definitely put dave in his place. Where
did you learn such advanced reasoning skills?

You mean Gummo, don't you?

wrote in message
ups.com...

So, Richard, I take it that psychoanalysis is not bringing very many clients
to your door. I understand completely. No patient would want to lie on a
couch and listen to you rant for an hour.

Luv,
SHP

soundhaspriority wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

So, Richard, I take it that psychoanalysis is not bringing very many clients
to your door. I understand completely. No patient would want to lie on a
couch and listen to you rant for an hour.

Luv,
SHP

Bob, your message may be deadly but the address is
wrong.
No Englishman- not even a psychiatrist- would have baseball pop up into
his
brain as an apt metaphor. Cricket is the name of the game.
The original SHP in his Yahoo and other disguises is not a Londoner.
I know psychiatrists- SHP's jargon is not their jargon either.
Not that it matters who exactly is selling the Belt product on the web.
Ludovic Mirabel.

Ludo said:

The original SHP in his Yahoo and other disguises is not a Londoner.

Maybe he migrated from the New World.




--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

So, Richard, I take it that psychoanalysis is not bringing very many
clients
to your door. I understand completely. No patient would want to lie on a
couch and listen to you rant for an hour.

Luv,
SHP

Bob, your message may be deadly but the address is
wrong.
No Englishman- not even a psychiatrist- would have baseball pop up into
his
brain as an apt metaphor. Cricket is the name of the game.
The original SHP in his Yahoo and other disguises is not a Londoner.
I know psychiatrists- SHP's jargon is not their jargon either.
Not that it matters who exactly is selling the Belt product on the web.
Ludovic Mirabel.

Ludo,
My opinion is that Dr. Graham has superior intelligence in many
respects, and, as he makes a hobby of deception, deliberately uses metaphors
to confuse. His approach to us smacks of the Turing Test, which essentially
means that the more intelligent entity can lie undetectably to the less
intelligent entity. I feel that in this regard, his posts contain a lot of
cold calculation in the tradition of counterintelligence deception. While it
is also the case that his posts exhibit lack of balance, sheer lunacy, and
possibly drug-induced mania, we should not discount the the capability to
function at a superior intellectual level.

The cons have a slogan among them: "There ain't a horse that can't be
ridden", which means, there is no one who cannot be deceived. In a mental
jiu-jitsu, the con deceives the victim into believing that he is more
intelligent than the con.
It appears to me that Dr. Graham has made this a side interest of his study
of mental processes. He knows, as you have quoted, that 29% or so will
respond to a placebo. He used this as the basic fact of his assault on this
group.

Thus, I suggest that you have underestimated the extremely high formal
intelligence of this individual. It is easy to do so, due to the extreme
instability of his emotional makeup, and the inadequacy of his "theory of
mind", which leaves him in the dark as to the mental processes of others,
except in an extremely formal sense.

Bob Morein

On Wed, 17 May 2006 14:14:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...

soundhaspriority wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

So, Richard, I take it that psychoanalysis is not bringing very many
clients
to your door. I understand completely. No patient would want to lie on a
couch and listen to you rant for an hour.

Luv,
SHP

Bob, your message may be deadly but the address is
wrong.
No Englishman- not even a psychiatrist- would have baseball pop up into
his
brain as an apt metaphor. Cricket is the name of the game.
The original SHP in his Yahoo and other disguises is not a Londoner.
I know psychiatrists- SHP's jargon is not their jargon either.
Not that it matters who exactly is selling the Belt product on the web.
Ludovic Mirabel.

Ludo,
My opinion is that Dr. Graham has superior intelligence in many
respects, and, as he makes a hobby of deception, deliberately uses metaphors
to confuse. His approach to us smacks of the Turing Test, which essentially
means that the more intelligent entity can lie undetectably to the less
intelligent entity. I feel that in this regard, his posts contain a lot of
cold calculation in the tradition of counterintelligence deception. While it
is also the case that his posts exhibit lack of balance, sheer lunacy, and
possibly drug-induced mania, we should not discount the the capability to
function at a superior intellectual level.

The cons have a slogan among them: "There ain't a horse that can't be
ridden", which means, there is no one who cannot be deceived. In a mental
jiu-jitsu, the con deceives the victim into believing that he is more
intelligent than the con.
It appears to me that Dr. Graham has made this a side interest of his study
of mental processes. He knows, as you have quoted, that 29% or so will
respond to a placebo. He used this as the basic fact of his assault on this
group.

Thus, I suggest that you have underestimated the extremely high formal
intelligence of this individual. It is easy to do so, due to the extreme
instability of his emotional makeup, and the inadequacy of his "theory of
mind", which leaves him in the dark as to the mental processes of others,
except in an extremely formal sense.

Bob Morein

Robert, I still can't help feeling you're drawing a rather long bow
here. No one is THAT intelligent, still less that vigilant. Little
things such as I pointed out--Mr Sound using the term "off of", which
no one outside North America uses--indicate that he can't be British.
Frankly, in the absence of further evidence we're back to Ockham's
Razor---the most obvious conclusion is probably the correct one.

You know--and I say this most gently--we're all prone to
over-intellectualise. The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition? More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.

Of course you may have other evidence you don't want to disclose. But
I can only go on what I read here, and that doesn't convince me Mr.
Sound is other than a very clever, very egotistical, long-time Usenet
poster who, as he claims, has done all this before many times. Indeed,
his easy facility with insult and abuse virtually screams that at us.
In what other school would he gain these skills? The sheer volume of
his posts indicates that, to say nothing of the (sometimes amusing)
inventiveness of his attacks. Maybe the only thing about him that
supports your conclusion is a certain malicious insight in his
posts--insight not necessarily into individuals here but into types.
If he isn't a psychiatrist he probably could have been.

Anyway, that's my 2c.

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 May 2006 14:14:30 -0400, "Robert Morein"
[snip]
You know--and I say this most gently--we're all prone to
over-intellectualise. The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition? More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.

Of course you may have other evidence you don't want to disclose. But
I can only go on what I read here, and that doesn't convince me Mr.
Sound is other than a very clever, very egotistical, long-time Usenet
poster who, as he claims, has done all this before many times.
[snip]

Paul, my evaluation is based on private conversations, observations of
stimulus-response, and some specific content of his posts. In other words, I
pressed certain buttons, certain reactions occurred. These reactions were
missed by others reading Dr. Graham's posts, because they didn't know what
to look for. There was a veritable DaVinci code in Dr. Graham's posts,
intepretable by me because I communicated with people in London who knew Dr.
Graham, or knew people who knew him.

I have collaborated with the FBI on another case with some similarities.
From this, I learned how long it takes them to get information from an ISP
by subpoena. Dr. Graham felt an urgency to leave this group on about the
timescale required for authorities in the UK to obtain positive ID of who he
is, dated from the time I initially contacted these authorities. In his
posts, Dr. Graham referred to a fact of which only he, I, and authorities in
the U.K. are aware. I would appreciate if you would not publicly speculate
on what that is, although I will be happy to tell you in private
communication.

Article , "paul packer"
wrote:
The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition? More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.
It's you that's " over-intellectualising", Paul. The reasoning process by
which you have these discussions presupposes that Robert Morein is a
thinking, rational human being. However he's made these spurious charges
against many others, whom he stalks relentlessly - including one of your own
countrymen. The "wackjob bob" moniker attached by Dr. Graham is a whole lot
closer to the truth than Bob's own semilucid conversations with you. We've
already begun to get legal communications from the real Dr. Graham which is
how Bob knows so much of how ISP's subpoena computer records. Stay clear -
this one is going to get ugly.

Just like that last few failed careers he's had, (movie producer, inventor,
high-speed pump designer) he spends my hard-earned money to get all the
right props, so he can pretend he's now a sound engineer.

He'd rather do this than try to enroll in a school (he gets frustrated with
educators that don't agree with his uneducated ideas) or actually apprentice
at the feet of some well know professional, like his stalking victim Bryan
McCarty.

"OFFICIAL RAM BLUEBOOK VALUATION" is actually Robert Morein, a pest on
rec.audio.marketplace, where he accuses innocent sellers of various
misdeeds. He appears to be a pathological liar, with unknown motivations.

Morein is the owner of websites http://www.studentsandthelaw.org, which have
used fraudulent advertising in attempts to attract investors. Both have been
unsuccessful. Morein is known to associate with sexual predators and
pedophiles including Brian McCarty. http://tinyurl.com/dua95

Morein is an Israeli expatriate, originally from the Trenton area, where he
went to college for 12 years without any degree ever being conferred. He
then tried suing Drexel University for fraud, but the court rejected
Morein's arguments. As everyone with a lick of sense does. Morein is known
to associate with sexual predators and pedophiles including Brian McCarty.
http://tinyurl.com/dua95

Morien is currently living in his daddy's house in Dresher Pennsylvania,
where he manages to stalk a wide variety of people while swilling beer and
ogling the neighbors. He has no job. He never has. He never will. Morein is
known to associate with sexual predators and pedophiles including Brian
McCarty. http://tinyurl.com/dua95
His daddy's house is located at

1570 Arran Way
Dresher, PA
215-646-4894

Morien lives at 1570 Arran Way, Dresher Pennsylvania,
a bit west of metropolitan Philadelphia.
Morein is known to associate with sexual predators and
pedophiles including Brian McCarty. http://tinyurl.com/dua95

Robert Morein can be contacted at

"Sylvan Morein, DDS" wrote in message
...
Article , "paul packer"
wrote:
The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition? More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.
It's you that's " over-intellectualising", Paul.

Now Brian, it's a bit too late to try that with Paul.

On Thu, 18 May 2006 01:14:09 -0500, "Sylvan Morein, DDS"
wrote:

Article , "paul packer"
wrote:
The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition? More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.
It's you that's " over-intellectualising", Paul. The reasoning process by
which you have these discussions presupposes that Robert Morein is a
thinking, rational human being. However he's made these spurious charges
against many others, whom he stalks relentlessly - including one of your own
countrymen. The "wackjob bob" moniker attached by Dr. Graham is a whole lot
closer to the truth than Bob's own semilucid conversations with you. We've
already begun to get legal communications from the real Dr. Graham which is
how Bob knows so much of how ISP's subpoena computer records. Stay clear -
this one is going to get ugly.

I'll certainly be happy to sit this one out as you suggest, Mr.
Morein. BTW, may I say how well you write for such an elderly
gentleman. Such facility of mind is not only astonishing in a man of
your advanced age, but an exemplar for us younger folk.
Congratulations. :-)

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 May 2006 01:14:09 -0500, "Sylvan Morein, DDS"
wrote:

Article , "paul packer"
wrote:
The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition? More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.
It's you that's " over-intellectualising", Paul. The reasoning process by
which you have these discussions presupposes that Robert Morein is a
thinking, rational human being. However he's made these spurious charges
against many others, whom he stalks relentlessly - including one of your
own
countrymen. The "wackjob bob" moniker attached by Dr. Graham is a whole
lot
closer to the truth than Bob's own semilucid conversations with you. We've
already begun to get legal communications from the real Dr. Graham which
is
how Bob knows so much of how ISP's subpoena computer records. Stay clear -
this one is going to get ugly.

I'll certainly be happy to sit this one out as you suggest, Mr.
Morein. BTW, may I say how well you write for such an elderly
gentleman. Such facility of mind is not only astonishing in a man of
your advanced age, but an exemplar for us younger folk.
Congratulations. :-)

Paul, you just called him ""Mr.". He's a doctor. Give him the respect he
deserves :-)

On Thu, 18 May 2006 09:07:41 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 May 2006 01:14:09 -0500, "Sylvan Morein, DDS"
wrote:

Article , "paul packer"
wrote:
The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition? More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.
It's you that's " over-intellectualising", Paul. The reasoning process by
which you have these discussions presupposes that Robert Morein is a
thinking, rational human being. However he's made these spurious charges
against many others, whom he stalks relentlessly - including one of your
own
countrymen. The "wackjob bob" moniker attached by Dr. Graham is a whole
lot
closer to the truth than Bob's own semilucid conversations with you. We've
already begun to get legal communications from the real Dr. Graham which
is
how Bob knows so much of how ISP's subpoena computer records. Stay clear -
this one is going to get ugly.

I'll certainly be happy to sit this one out as you suggest, Mr.
Morein. BTW, may I say how well you write for such an elderly
gentleman. Such facility of mind is not only astonishing in a man of
your advanced age, but an exemplar for us younger folk.
Congratulations. :-)

Paul, you just called him ""Mr.". He's a doctor. Give him the respect he
deserves :-)


Oh God!!! Sorry, Doctor.

wrote:

soundhaspriority wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

So, Richard, I take it that psychoanalysis is not bringing very many clients
to your door. I understand completely. No patient would want to lie on a
couch and listen to you rant for an hour.

Luv,
SHP

Bob, your message may be deadly but the address is
wrong.

Your message may be "deadly"? ROTFLMAO!! To WHOM? Lunatic sociopaths
all over usenet?! Pffffffft! Wackjob Bob's only "message" in all of his
wacky psychotic trolls is that he's a man who's absolutely out to
lunch. One who can not and will never be taken seriously. A man who's
-finished- as far as a career and a reputation goes.

No Englishman- not even a psychiatrist- would have baseball pop up into
his brain as an apt metaphor. Cricket is the name of the game.

Oh darn, there goes my cover! You're too smart for me, Dr. Mirabel.

The original SHP in his Yahoo and other disguises is not a Londoner.

Wow! What a revelation. What a brilliant mind you've proven to posess.
Wait a second... didn't I already mention this 65 times already, and
provide incontrovertible proof of such? (Not that there is such a thing
as "incontrovertible proof" to you RAO regulars). Is there some rule on
RAO that says you have to have an IQ -below- 20 to retain membership?

Tell me again Ludovich, about my "clever ruse" of insulting people here
so's I can sell them beltist products. I -love- that one. How many
vials of electret cream did it make YOU want to buy, you stupid retard?

I don't think you've ever had anyone laugh at you as much as I have,
fool.

I know psychiatrists- SHP's jargon is not their jargon either.

Maybe, but Wackjob Bob is a "screenwriter" dont forget. Therefore, he
knows "writing styles" and "characters" as he claims. How -dare- you
argue with his brilliant ****ed-up mind?!

Not that it matters who exactly is selling the Belt product on the web.
Ludovic Mirabel.

Uh, the *Belts* are selling Belt product on the web, you stupid retard.
Proof:

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk

Not that "proof" means anything to the Retards of RAO. I just posted
that for anyone that isn't as dumb you dumb gits (you, Packer, Middius
and Morein), and has a means of logical and rational thought. If I
really was a doctor as you claim to be, I would bloody well be ashamed
at posting serious drivel like you just did here. Retired or not, you
make Dr. Nick Riviera look good.

Dr. Robert "Hannibal Lecter", (aka "Wackjob Bob") spewed this venomous
BS:

wrote in message
oups.com...

soundhaspriority wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

So, Richard, I take it that psychoanalysis is not bringing very many
clients
to your door. I understand completely. No patient would want to lie on a
couch and listen to you rant for an hour.

Luv,
SHP

Bob, your message may be deadly but the address is
wrong.
No Englishman- not even a psychiatrist- would have baseball pop up into
his
brain as an apt metaphor. Cricket is the name of the game.

The original SHP in his Yahoo and other disguises is not a Londoner.
I know psychiatrists- SHP's jargon is not their jargon either.
Not that it matters who exactly is selling the Belt product on the web.
Ludovic Mirabel.



Ludo,
My opinion is that Dr. Graham has superior intelligence in many
respects, and, as he makes a hobby of deception, deliberately uses metaphors
to confuse.

Pfffffffffftttt! You've proven countless times that one does not have
to have "superior intelligence" to confuse YOU, you bleeding idiot. You
come already permanently confused. At one point you said I was "Cujo",
at another point, you said I was "Richard Belt". On another occasion
you threatened to "bust my teeth" if I ever showed up in the "midwest",
and then you said you abhor violence. (This was also after you
threatened to put a bullet in my head and break my cranium open with a
baseball bat.). And you can't tell who you are, any more than you can
tell who I am! One moment you pretend you're me, but you sign your
posts "Robert Morein". Now, just when you thought it was safe to go
back to the asshole that you were before, "Robert Morein", you renew
posting under that name. Frankly, given how your name is about as well
regarded as Adolf Hitler's at this point in your illustrious usenet
career, you were better off sticking with my name, you little thief.

His approach to us smacks of the Turing Test, which essentially
means that the more intelligent entity can lie undetectably to the less
intelligent entity.

That's certainly what you hope to do to your compatriots on RAO, in
lying about me being Graham, isn't it? And in your lies about not
having tried my L-shape tweak, when you admitted as much to me in your
private emails. You remember those? Back when you still had the
smallest ability to rationalize in an intelligent manner, before all
the meltdowns you had in public?

I feel that in this regard, his posts contain a lot of
cold calculation in the tradition of counterintelligence deception. While it
is also the case that his posts exhibit lack of balance, sheer lunacy, and
possibly drug-induced mania, we should not discount the the capability to
function at a superior intellectual level.

Yup, you still have the ability to offer no end of reasons as to why
they call you "Wackjob Bob". You make the rest of the paranoid
conspiracy lunatics on RAO look positively sane. Time to take your
meds, Wackjob. Time to take your meds....


The cons have a slogan among them: "There ain't a horse that can't be
ridden", which means, there is no one who cannot be deceived. In a mental
jiu-jitsu, the con deceives the victim into believing that he is more
intelligent than the con.

Wow, another brilliant theory from the 7 phd master. Just a wee
problem with that, you freaking genius: If I'm supposed to be
performing "mental jui-jitsu" (and its "mental judo" btw...) on the
narrow-minded bigoted imbeciles that populate this group, by "deceiving
them into believing they're more intelligent than me", that doesn't
help to explain why I keep calling them "idiots, imbeciles, cretins,
and retards", does it, you stupid retard?

What you have always failed to realize you blithering fool, is that
overanalysis makes you as stupid as one who fails to analyze deeply
enough. The result is, because you keep overshooting the mark, you're
even less closer to the truth about -everything- than someone with not
even half your intellectual training, such as Paul Packer. When your
intelligence is beaten by an Aussie of all things, I think its time to
stop trying, Wackjob Bob. So much for your claimed "superiority of
Americans", pffffffft! LOL!

It appears to me that Dr. Graham has made this a side interest of his study
of mental processes.

If Dr. Graham made you a side interest of his study of mental
processes, I'm sure he'd find that his adolescent patients are a lot
more mentally stable than you are.


Bob Morein describing himself to a T:

Thus, I suggest that you have underestimated the extremely high formal
intelligence of this individual. It is easy to do so, due to the extreme
instability of his emotional makeup, and the inadequacy of his "theory of
mind", which leaves him in the dark as to the mental processes of others,
except in an extremely formal sense.

Bob Morein

Thank you Wackjob Bob. I could not have described your problems in any
better terms than that.

Paul Packer was responsible for this mess below:

Uh, I'm not dead and I didn't go blind, you morons. I can still read
your obsessive garbage about me, and I see that you STILL have nothing
better to do than talk insane, pointless crap about me, ie. whether I'm
an "adolescent psychiatrist from London" or not. One of you sheep
("Wackjob BOb Morein") says I am, and you all follow and go
"baaaaaaaa". Don't think I'm impressed because you're only now
-starting- to question the Wackjob sheep about his claim. Fact is, your
post below shows that you're STILL susceptible to being influenced by
this nutsack. All he has to do is present "secret evidence" to you, and
you're "back on the Graham bandwagon", like the mindless sheep I always
said you were.

Thanks Packer, for reaffirming everything I claimed to be true about
RAO participants in "Message to the ignorant pigs of RAO" and
elsewhere. So sad that you people are wasting your lives around this
nonsense, though. Perhaps its all for the best, because at least you're
not out robbing people.

Robert, I still can't help feeling you're drawing a rather long bow
here. No one is THAT intelligent, still less that vigilant. Little
things such as I pointed out--Mr Sound using the term "off of", which
no one outside North America uses--indicate that he can't be British.
Frankly, in the absence of further evidence we're back to Ockham's
Razor---the most obvious conclusion is probably the correct one.

"Occam's Razor" only applies when Morein SAYS it applies. As with all
the hypocrites here on RAO (Mumbles Middius, etc), none of your
criticisms apply to yourselves, only to others.

Wackjob Bob Morein wrote:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Previously, I compared your mode of thinking to a complex,
imaginative
tapestry, while mine is a simple doormat. I am strongly attracted to
the criteria known as Occam's Razor, which states that of competing
theories, the simplest is the most likely to be correct. To apply
Occam's Razor, it is only necessary to pare away every unessential
hypothesis. An intellectual dinner of beans can be most satisfying. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------


By the way, and this is the God's honest truth: I intended to show that
Morein used the Occam's Razor principle in his defense, elsewhere, by
searching for it in his posts. Before I did, I had no way of knowing
that he ever did use it, but I know Morein enough to know it's
something he's likely to have used, and I know enough about what a
filthy hypocrite he is to believe that he did use it. Not only was I
right, but he used it -many times- in his arguments before others. Yet,
blithely ignores it in his own arguments!

You know--and I say this most gently--we're all prone to
over-intellectualise.

Yeah, better make sure you say it "most gently", don't want to offend
your RAO brothers by hitting them too hard with "the truth", now do
you?! Since you're attempting to be honest, which is a very rare
occasion by a RAO regular, why don't we be a little more complete he

RAO regulars are all prone to:

- over-intellectualize
- hypocrisy
- arrogance
- dismiss rational thought
- blind speculation and inference
- narrow-mindedness
- closed-mindedness
- maliciousness
- mean-spiritedness
- paranoid conspiracy theorizing
- lying (consciously or otherwise)
- wasting enormous amounts of time engaging in pointless flame attacks



The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition?

Are you kidding me? Since WHEN is that necessary on RAO?! Newsflash
idiot: I already proved it wasn't in my post "Message to the ignorant
pigs of RAO...". "Truth" on RAO, whether it be about audio or me or
someone else, is -only- ever based on "inference and supposition".

That's why I laugh so much when I laugh at you, Packer.

More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.

Oh, you "suspect" the latter, do you? No, the entire court would be
laughing even harder than I do at both you fools, if you and Morein
were to present them your "evidence" that I'm Graham!

By the way, I thought you said you didn't care whether I was Graham or
not, and here you are, can't stop talking about this issue with Wackjob
Bob? Refer back to what I said about RAO members being "hypocrites".

Of course you may have other evidence you don't want to disclose.

Oh yes, of course. Morein is closely linked to "the Belt mafia" as we
all know. He's got "so many" sources of contacts within "the network",
so you'd better hang on his every word as you're now doing. Because its
not like he's ****ing with your little Ozzie head, you stupid twit.

But
I can only go on what I read here, and that doesn't convince me Mr.
Sound is other than a very clever, very egotistical, long-time Usenet
poster who, as he claims, has done all this before many times.

You mean I might actually have not lied about something? You mean
Wackjob Bob might actually be wrong?? Preposterous!

Indeed, his easy facility with insult and abuse virtually screams that at us.

And YET.... it still fails to unanimously convince many of you (ie.
you, Wackjob Bob, Ludovic, Middius, Powell, etc.) that I'm not a London
adolescent psychiatrist and uni maths professor, you bleeding
imbeciles. Which proves my point all along: you people are so
incredibly stupid, that one can whack your skulls in with "a
sledgehammer of truth and logic", and you'll STILL not quite "get it",
and cling to your idiotic belief systems. The same idiotic belief
systems that convince you it isn't worth wasting 30 seconds of your
precious usenet flaming time to discover that there's a whole other
world of science in audio you never knew about!

In what other school would he gain these skills? The sheer volume of
his posts indicates that, to say nothing of the (sometimes amusing)
inventiveness of his attacks.

What do you mean "sometimes amusing"? They're ALWAYS amusing!

Maybe the only thing about him that
supports your conclusion is a certain malicious insight in his
posts--insight not necessarily into individuals here but into types.
If he isn't a psychiatrist he probably could have been.

Anyway, that's my 2c.

It may be 2c, but its worth a lot more than anything I've read from
Wackjob Bob. Way to obsess about me, Packer! I can see how important I
am in your life.

wrote:
wrote:

soundhaspriority wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

So, Richard, I take it that psychoanalysis is not bringing very many clients
to your door. I understand completely. No patient would want to lie on a
couch and listen to you rant for an hour.

Luv,
SHP

Bob, your message may be deadly but the address is
wrong.

Your message may be "deadly"? ROTFLMAO!! To WHOM? Lunatic sociopaths
all over usenet?! Pffffffft! Wackjob Bob's only "message" in all of his
wacky psychotic trolls is that he's a man who's absolutely out to
lunch. One who can not and will never be taken seriously. A man who's
-finished- as far as a career and a reputation goes.

No Englishman- not even a psychiatrist- would have baseball pop up into
his brain as an apt metaphor. Cricket is the name of the game.

Oh darn, there goes my cover! You're too smart for me, Dr. Mirabel.

The original SHP in his Yahoo and other disguises is not a Londoner.

Wow! What a revelation. What a brilliant mind you've proven to posess.
Wait a second... didn't I already mention this 65 times already, and
provide incontrovertible proof of such? (Not that there is such a thing
as "incontrovertible proof" to you RAO regulars). Is there some rule on
RAO that says you have to have an IQ -below- 20 to retain membership?

Tell me again Ludovich, about my "clever ruse" of insulting people here
so's I can sell them beltist products. I -love- that one. How many
vials of electret cream did it make YOU want to buy, you stupid retard?

I don't think you've ever had anyone laugh at you as much as I have,
fool.

I know psychiatrists- SHP's jargon is not their jargon either.

Maybe, but Wackjob Bob is a "screenwriter" dont forget. Therefore, he
knows "writing styles" and "characters" as he claims. How -dare- you
argue with his brilliant ****ed-up mind?!

Not that it matters who exactly is selling the Belt product on the web.
Ludovic Mirabel.

Uh, the *Belts* are selling Belt product on the web, you stupid retard.
Proof:

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk

Not that "proof" means anything to the Retards of RAO. I just posted
that for anyone that isn't as dumb you dumb gits (you, Packer, Middius
and Morein), and has a means of logical and rational thought. If I
really was a doctor as you claim to be, I would bloody well be ashamed
at posting serious drivel like you just did here. Retired or not, you
make Dr. Nick Riviera look good.

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

SHP says in his best indignant fashion:
Not that it matters who exactly is selling the Belt product on the
web.
Ludovic Mirabel.

Uh, the *Belts* are selling Belt product on the web, you stupid retard.
Proof:

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk

I followed your career in RAO with interest and amusement.
You are fun even when so blatantly transparent as when you manage
to slip in the Belts' email- any pretext is good enough..
As for idiot MDs I have known many. What else is news?
You're
slipping. You used to think of more original insults. Are you losing
your
nerve?. Or are the Belts getting impatient and demanding results?
Regards. Ludovic Mirabel

On 20 May 2006 12:11:10 -0700, wrote:

Paul Packer was responsible for this mess below:

And where is this mess, pray tell? Below you say: "It may be 2c, but
its worth a lot more than anything I've read from Wackjob Bob." Why
is a post questioning Robert's conclusions "a mess"?

Uh, I'm not dead and I didn't go blind, you morons. I can still read
your obsessive garbage about me,

Funnily enough we were aware of that. After you post to an NG for a
few years, you become slowly aware that anyone can read what you
write. It even says that on Google Groups.

However, you're not very true to your word as in your last post you
said you wouldn't be reading RAO anymore. Naughty, naughty.

and I see that you STILL have nothing
better to do than talk insane, pointless crap about me, ie. whether I'm
an "adolescent psychiatrist from London" or not.

Conjecture is a legitimate human activity, Mr. sound. After all,
you've written so much here about yourself--so inventively and
amusingly too--that we're interested in you. No, we're not
obsessed--or I'M not, anyway. But interested. Not as interested as you
are in yourself, of course, but that wouldn't be possible.

One of you sheep
("Wackjob BOb Morein") says I am, and you all follow and go
"baaaaaaaa".

Really? I thought my post was about not following and going "baaaaa".

Don't think I'm impressed because you're only now
-starting- to question the Wackjob sheep about his claim.

Now you're saying we ought to have said a lot more about you a lot
sooner, when you've just said we say far too much about you as it is.
Fact is, I never bought the "Richard Graham" thing, but since there
were frequent allusions to things going on behind the scenes, I
thought I'd better just shut up. I wasn't that interested anyway.
Since it kept you posting your funny posts (Don Rickles was my
favourite comedian) I was happy to let things drift and continue
rolling on the floor laughing.

Fact is, your
post below shows that you're STILL susceptible to being influenced by
this nutsack. All he has to do is present "secret evidence" to you, and
you're "back on the Graham bandwagon", like the mindless sheep I always
said you were.

And where's the evidence that "all he has to do is present secret
evidence to you and you're back on the Graham bandwagon"? He hasn't
presented the "secret evidence", merely alluded to it. And no one,
least of all me, has suggested that they accept this evidence they
haven't asked for and don't have. Getting a bit ahead of yourself, Mr.
Sound. My whole post is about questioning Robert's evidence and
conclusions. I hear no "baaaaa" in that.

Thanks Packer, for reaffirming everything I claimed to be true about
RAO participants in "Message to the ignorant pigs of RAO" and
elsewhere. So sad that you people are wasting your lives around this
nonsense, though. Perhaps its all for the best, because at least you're
not out robbing people.

The main thing is that we don't rob you of what is most precious to
you---attention. That would be a crime indeed.

Robert, I still can't help feeling you're drawing a rather long bow
here. No one is THAT intelligent, still less that vigilant. Little
things such as I pointed out--Mr Sound using the term "off of", which
no one outside North America uses--indicate that he can't be British.
Frankly, in the absence of further evidence we're back to Ockham's
Razor---the most obvious conclusion is probably the correct one.

"Occam's Razor" only applies when Morein SAYS it applies. As with all
the hypocrites here on RAO (Mumbles Middius, etc), none of your
criticisms apply to yourselves, only to others.

I didn't realize RAO was intended to be a place of self-criticism. I
certainly haven't seen you indulging in it much.

I think you're thinking of the (dare I say it?) psychiatrist's couch.

Wackjob Bob Morein wrote:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Previously, I compared your mode of thinking to a complex,
imaginative
tapestry, while mine is a simple doormat. I am strongly attracted to
the criteria known as Occam's Razor, which states that of competing
theories, the simplest is the most likely to be correct. To apply
Occam's Razor, it is only necessary to pare away every unessential
hypothesis. An intellectual dinner of beans can be most satisfying. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------


By the way, and this is the God's honest truth: I intended to show that
Morein used the Occam's Razor principle in his defense, elsewhere, by
searching for it in his posts. Before I did, I had no way of knowing
that he ever did use it, but I know Morein enough to know it's
something he's likely to have used, and I know enough about what a
filthy hypocrite he is to believe that he did use it. Not only was I
right, but he used it -many times- in his arguments before others. Yet,
blithely ignores it in his own arguments!

You know--and I say this most gently--we're all prone to
over-intellectualise.

Yeah, better make sure you say it "most gently", don't want to offend
your RAO brothers by hitting them too hard with "the truth", now do
you?!

Good manners and consideration for others are their own reward. :-)

Since you're attempting to be honest, which is a very rare
occasion by a RAO regular, why don't we be a little more complete he

RAO regulars are all prone to:

- over-intellectualize
- hypocrisy
- arrogance
- dismiss rational thought
- blind speculation and inference
- narrow-mindedness
- closed-mindedness
- maliciousness
- mean-spiritedness
- paranoid conspiracy theorizing
- lying (consciously or otherwise)
- wasting enormous amounts of time engaging in pointless flame attacks

Well, it's easy to list the faults of others. Now let's see a list of
your own faults. Take as much paper as you need, but keep within the
margins .

The reasoning processes by which you arrived at
the conclusion Mr. sound was Richard Graham just strike me as too
subtle and circuitous. Is there any firm evidence not based on
inference and supposition?

Are you kidding me? Since WHEN is that necessary on RAO?! Newsflash
idiot: I already proved it wasn't in my post "Message to the ignorant
pigs of RAO...". "Truth" on RAO, whether it be about audio or me or
someone else, is -only- ever based on "inference and supposition".

That could have something to do with the fact that this is an NG. That
is, we never meet and know nothing about each other but what we read
here. Think that could be a contributing factor, Mr. Sound?

That's why I laugh so much when I laugh at you, Packer.

Good. I owe you a laugh or two back.

More to the point, if you presented the
evidence you currently have to a court, would they convict or dismiss?
I suspect the latter.

Oh, you "suspect" the latter, do you? No, the entire court would be
laughing even harder than I do at both you fools, if you and Morein
were to present them your "evidence" that I'm Graham!

Hang on! How is the evidence "your" evidence? I'm the one questioning
the evidence--why would I be presenting it as my evidence? Fair's
fair, Mr Sound. As for the mild tone of my post, which you're
obviously mocking, it's not everyone's style to burst into a room and
shove everyone back in their chairs. If it works for you, fine, but
some of us like to be a little more polite.

By the way, I thought you said you didn't care whether I was Graham or
not, and here you are, can't stop talking about this issue with Wackjob
Bob? Refer back to what I said about RAO members being "hypocrites".

Of course you may have other evidence you don't want to disclose.

Oh yes, of course. Morein is closely linked to "the Belt mafia" as we
all know. He's got "so many" sources of contacts within "the network",
so you'd better hang on his every word as you're now doing. Because its
not like he's ****ing with your little Ozzie head, you stupid twit.

Every heard the phrase "going off half-cocked"? I'm simply considering
all possibilities. Fact is, I don't know any more of Robert than what
I read here, including the contributions from McCarty. I don't know
who or what his contacts are, so how can I dispute what information he
may or may not have? As for "hanging on his every word", my whole post
is about not accepting his every word, isn't it? So where is he
"****ing with my little Ozzie head"? If that were happening I'd be
saying, "Yes, you're right, Robert; I see your point,
Robert...baaaaa." Where do you see that sentence in my post? Come on,
Mr. Sound. You pride yourself on a superior intellect. A superior
intellect obeys the laws of logic.

But
I can only go on what I read here, and that doesn't convince me Mr.
Sound is other than a very clever, very egotistical, long-time Usenet
poster who, as he claims, has done all this before many times.

You mean I might actually have not lied about something? You mean
Wackjob Bob might actually be wrong?? Preposterous!

Empty sarcasm. The post is about suggesting Robert might be wrong.

Indeed, his easy facility with insult and abuse virtually screams that at us.

And YET.... it still fails to unanimously convince many of you (ie.
you, Wackjob Bob, Ludovic, Middius, Powell, etc.) that I'm not a London
adolescent psychiatrist and uni maths professor, you bleeding
imbeciles.

Not convince me? The whole post is about it not convincing me. And I
don't know that the others have all shown unequivocal support for the
theory either. I think you're convicting here without evidence or due
process, Mr. Sound. Shame. I hope you're not a lawyer.

Which proves my point all along: you people are so
incredibly stupid, that one can whack your skulls in with "a
sledgehammer of truth and logic", and you'll STILL not quite "get it",
and cling to your idiotic belief systems.

More virtual violence. I really think a spot of anger management
should be in your future.

The same idiotic belief
systems that convince you it isn't worth wasting 30 seconds of your
precious usenet flaming time to discover that there's a whole other
world of science in audio you never knew about!

But we prize our usenet flaming time. :-)

In what other school would he gain these skills? The sheer volume of
his posts indicates that, to say nothing of the (sometimes amusing)
inventiveness of his attacks.

What do you mean "sometimes amusing"? They're ALWAYS amusing!

Maybe the only thing about him that
supports your conclusion is a certain malicious insight in his
posts--insight not necessarily into individuals here but into types.
If he isn't a psychiatrist he probably could have been.

Anyway, that's my 2c.

It may be 2c, but its worth a lot more than anything I've read from
Wackjob Bob. Way to obsess about me, Packer! I can see how important I
am in your life.

You're certainly important to my health, as they say laughter is the
best medicine.

BTW, what do you have against Australians? We're not that bad.

On 20 May 2006 13:01:22 -0700, "
wrote:


As for idiot MDs I have known many. What else is news?
You're
slipping. You used to think of more original insults. Are you losing
your
nerve?. Or are the Belts getting impatient and demanding results?
Regards. Ludovic Mirabel

You mean more and better insults, Ludovic? Hows about if we wrote Mr.
Sound's best insults on an L shaped, pinholed piece of cardboard and
rested it on top of our amplifiers. Apart from the amplifiers
eventually overheating, I believe we'd get better sound just from the
proximity of such wit to our electronics. In other words, the thermal
transfer of humour, a whole new theory of tweaking.