Data proves no sex abuse crisis

[J]

Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:



The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
have a problem with priestly sexual abuse. Of the nearly 40,000
priests in the U.S., there were 34 allegations made by minors last
year (32 priests, two deacons): six were deemed credible by law
enforcement; 12 were either unfounded or unable to be proven; one was
a �boundary violation�; and 15 are still being probed. Moreover, in
every case brought to the attention of the bishops or heads of
religious orders, the civil authorities were notified.

Not counting those of unknown status, in 88 percent of the total
number of cases (independent of when they allegedly occurred), the
accused priest is either deceased, has been dismissed from ministry,
or has been laicized.

Most of the allegations reported to church officials today have
nothing to do with current cases: two-thirds date back to the 1960s,
1970s and the first half of the 1980s. As usual, the problem is not
pedophilia: 19 percent of the allegations involving those who work in
dioceses or eparchies, and 7 percent of religious order priests and
deacons, involve pedophilia. In other words, the problem remains what
it has always been�an issue involving homosexual priests (85 percent
of the victims were male).

Anyone who knows of any religious, or secular, organization that has
less of a problem with the sexual abuse of minors these days should
contact the Catholic League. We�d love to match numbers.

One more thing: since nearly 100 percent of our priests did not have a
credible allegation made against him last year, this should be picked
up by the media. But it won�t be. Look for the story to get buried.










J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com

Honesty. Decency. Integrity

[Syd M.]

On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
> The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.

Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.

PDW

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article
<d61a7991-dfa6-4946...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,

Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[Uncle Vic]

J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote in news:ru90p85jn9nd4ktf6pdvtnd9e1da6vp35t@
4ax.com:

>
>
> Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
>
>
> The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.

Who did they survey? A bunch of catholics-in-denial?

<snip>

>
> Anyone who knows of any religious, or secular, organization that has
> less of a problem with the sexual abuse of minors these days should
> contact the Catholic League. We’d love to match numbers.
>

BWAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHA! I'll bet they would!
--
Uncle Vic
aa# 2011
BAAWA

AA Quotemeister

Visit my You Tube Channel!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vicman6311?feature=mhee

[Dakota]

On 5/12/2013 7:31 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article
> <d61a7991-dfa6-4946...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> "Syd M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>>> Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
>>> Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>>>
>>> The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
>>> utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
>>> have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
>>
>> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
>
> Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
>

I agree that the vile Catholic Church doesn't have a problem with
priestly sexual abuse of kids. That's why it's gone on for centuries.
They do have a problem when it's exposed though so they do everything
in their power to conceal the heinous crimes.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <kmpemr$uj9$1...@dont-email.me>, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote:
...

>I agree that the vile Catholic Church doesn't have a problem with
>priestly sexual abuse of kids. That's why it's gone on for centuries.
>They do have a problem when it's exposed though so they do everything
>in their power to conceal the heinous crimes.

Yes. Best analysis is that the only result (and the desired result from the point of
view of TPTB) is to drive it back underground - i.e., to make it invisible again.

--
This is the GOP's problem. When you're at the beginning of the year
and you've got nine Democrats running for the nomination, maybe one or
two of them are Dennis Kucinich. When you have nine Republicans, seven
or eight of them are Michelle Bachmann.

[duke]

On Sun, 12 May 2013 17:31:25 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

>In article
><d61a7991-dfa6-4946...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> "Syd M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 12, 7:42�pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
>> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>> >
>> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
>> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
>> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
>>
>> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
>
>Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?

Yes, extensively truthful.

The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[Syd M.]

On May 12, 8:31 pm, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article
> <d61a7991-dfa6-4946-94c9-fb97cd257...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,

>  "Syd M." <pauldavidwri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> > > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> > > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
> > > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> > > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> > > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
>
> > Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
>
> Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
>
>

So, a Catholic study on Catholic crimes?
The Church investigating itself? Any one see the problem there?

PDW

[Syd M.]

On May 13, 7:32 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 May 2013 17:31:25 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><d61a7991-dfa6-4946-94c9-fb97cd257...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,

> > "Syd M." <pauldavidwri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> >> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
> >> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> >> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> >> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
>
> >> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
>
> >Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
>
> Yes, extensively truthful.
>
>

You misspelled 'lying', Dork.

PDW

[Devils Advocaat]

> jdyou...@ymail.com
>
> Honesty. Decency. Integrity

Open your eyes.

There have been incidents.

That in itself is a crisis.

Priests should abstain.

It's in the rules.

Those who can't.

Should leave.

Hand themselves to the police.

Admit their crime.

And accept due punishment.

[�RLMeasures]

In article
<696e2ac5-9024-453a...@b2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, "Syd
M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On May 12, 8:31=A0pm, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <d61a7991-dfa6-4946-94c9-fb97cd257...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,

> > =A0"Syd M." <pauldavidwri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> > > > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> > > > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
> >
> > > > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how

> > > > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues t=

> o
> > > > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
> >
> > > Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
> >
> > Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
> >
> >
>
> So, a Catholic study on Catholic crimes?
> The Church investigating itself? Any one see the problem there?
>

� this is like coyotes doing an in-depth study on chicken predation.

[Kenny McCormack]

Nothin' to see here. Move along. Move along.

--
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
expense.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <kmqngo$a10$1...@news.xmission.com>, gaz...@shell.xmission.com

(Kenny McCormack) wrote:

> In article <r-1305130...@10.0.1.3>, RLMeasures <r...@somis.org> wrote:
> >In article
> ><696e2ac5-9024-453a...@b2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, "Syd
> >M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On May 12, 8:31=A0pm, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > In article
> >> > <d61a7991-dfa6-4946-94c9-fb97cd257...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> >> > =A0"Syd M." <pauldavidwri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> >> > > > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
> >> >
> >> > > > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> >> > > > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church
continues t=
> >> o
> >> > > > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
> >> >
> >> > > Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
> >> >
> >> > Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> So, a Catholic study on Catholic crimes?
> >> The Church investigating itself? Any one see the problem there?
> >>
> >� this is like coyotes doing an in-depth study on chicken predation.
>
> Nothin' to see here. Move along. Move along.

� chortle.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <qnj1p8hgtkdg5gufc...@4ax.com>,

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 12 May 2013 17:31:25 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><d61a7991-dfa6-4946...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Syd M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On May 12, 7:42�pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> >> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
> >> >
> >> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> >> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> >> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
> >>
> >> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
> >
> >Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
>
> Yes, extensively truthful.

And, of course, you don't care about the appearance of conflict of
interest, as long as you get the answers you want. Truth be damned.

[Peter James]

J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:

> Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
>
>
> The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.

> Garbage snipped
I'm quite sure that they would have got, and expected, exactly the same
results to any survey run in the 1950,s through to the 1980's.

They ignore the fact that priestly abuse, is by its very nature
secretive and not something that the perpetrators scream from the
rooftops.

The Catholic Church surveying itself. Why there's a surprise.

Peter



--
He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see
that, if not actually disgruntled he was far from being gruntled.
P.G. Wodehouse 1881 - 1975

[duke]

On Mon, 13 May 2013 15:07:21 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

wrote:

>In article <qnj1p8hgtkdg5gufc...@4ax.com>,
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 12 May 2013 17:31:25 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article
>> ><d61a7991-dfa6-4946...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
>> > "Syd M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On May 12, 7:42�pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>> >> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
>> >> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>> >> >
>> >> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
>> >> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
>> >> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
>> >>
>> >> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.

>> >Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
>> Yes, extensively truthful.

>And, of course, you don't care about the appearance of conflict of
>interest, as long as you get the answers you want. Truth be damned.

Most of the conflict of interest comes from the likes of you. After all, the
RCC is charged with truth.

[duke]

On Tue, 14 May 2013 07:56:45 +0100, pfjam...@gm.mail.com (Peter James) wrote:

>J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
>> Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>>
>>
>>
>> The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
>> utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
>> have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
>> Garbage snipped
>I'm quite sure that they would have got, and expected, exactly the same
>results to any survey run in the 1950,s through to the 1980's.
>
>They ignore the fact that priestly abuse, is by its very nature
>secretive and not something that the perpetrators scream from the
>rooftops.
>
>The Catholic Church surveying itself. Why there's a surprise.
>Peter

Or atheists surveying themselves.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <r954p8t5irsdguu6f...@4ax.com>,

Did that actually mean something to you when you typed it?

[W.T.S.]

In article <r954p8t5irsdguu6f...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...

> On Mon, 13 May 2013 15:07:21 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <qnj1p8hgtkdg5gufc...@4ax.com>,
> > duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 12 May 2013 17:31:25 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article
> >> ><d61a7991-dfa6-4946...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> >> > "Syd M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <Jerk...@Lies.biz> wrote:
> >> >> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> >> >> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> >> >> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> >> >> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
> >> >>
> >> >> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
>
> >> >Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
> >> Yes, extensively truthful.
>
> >And, of course, you don't care about the appearance of conflict of
> >interest, as long as you get the answers you want. Truth be damned.
>
> Most of the conflict of interest comes from the likes of you. After all, the
> RCC is charged with truth.

Since when?
>
> The pukester, CatholiKKK Stool.
> ********************************************
> Renounce Catholicism.

> You simply can't fix stupid.
> ********************************************

Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/print/14481
>
http://www.jennyjerrome.org/
>
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22270271
>
http://tinyurl.com/anghyfr
>
http://tinyurl.com/a887er9
>
http://tinyurl.com/c4thugl
>
http://tinyurl.com/3j3fkch
>
http://www.egalitarian.biz/Plan-B--Remedy-of-a-Lifetime.html
>
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm
>
Breed like rabbits, live like pigs, die like rats!

>
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
expense.
>

http://www.imnotsorry.net
>
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17gbnyv0yzhevjpg/original.jpg
>
http://tinyurl.com/7q2ft38
>
http://tinyurl.com/7hk9gk8
>
http://tinyurl.com/ybmwsk4
>
http://tinyurl.com/ayk7czf
>
http://tinyurl.com/43hp62x
>
http://tinyurl.com/b29z62n
>
The methodology of the Religious and the Right has always been:
1. Lie.
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible.
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible.
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie.
5. The lie will then be made into some form of law.
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie.
-> Slow thinkers --> Stay Right

[W.T.S.]

In article <vd54p85hqq9l28tog...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
@cox.net says...

> On Tue, 14 May 2013 07:56:45 +0100, pfjam...@gm.mail.com (Peter James) wrote:
>

> >J <Jerk...@Lies.biz> wrote:
> >
> >> Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> >> Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
> >>
> >> The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> >> utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> >> have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
> >> Garbage snipped
> >I'm quite sure that they would have got, and expected, exactly the same
> >results to any survey run in the 1950,s through to the 1980's.
> >
> >They ignore the fact that priestly abuse, is by its very nature
> >secretive and not something that the perpetrators scream from the
> >rooftops.
> >
> >The Catholic Church surveying itself. Why there's a surprise.
> >Peter
>
> Or atheists surveying themselves.

For what? Atheists are just ordinary people, no better or worse. But,
they don't claim to have a direct line to "God" or pretend we can tell
other people how to live, especially in the bedroom or in matters of
reproduction. When we have an opinion, or a conjecture, we state it's
opinion or a conjecture, not "truth from the Almighty Himself".

>
> The pukester, CatholiKKK Stool.
> ********************************************
> Renounce Catholicism.

> You simply can't fix stupid.
> ********************************************

[Syd M.]

On May 14, 6:44 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 May 2013 15:07:21 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <qnj1p8hgtkdg5gufcdrpvq809fvaohk...@4ax.com>,
> > duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> On Sun, 12 May 2013 17:31:25 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

> >> wrote:
>
> >> >In article
> >> ><d61a7991-dfa6-4946-94c9-fb97cd257...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,

> >> > "Syd M." <pauldavidwri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> On May 12, 7:42 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> >> >> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
> >> >> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> >> >> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> >> >> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
>
> >> >> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go away, IBen.
> >> >Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?
> >> Yes, extensively truthful.
> >And, of course, you don't care about the appearance of conflict of
> >interest, as long as you get the answers you want. Truth  be damned.
>
> Most of the conflict of interest comes from the likes of you.  After all, the
> RCC is charged with truth.
>
>

Then it is failing big time.

PDW

[Syd M.]

On May 14, 6:45 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 14 May 2013 07:56:45 +0100, pfjames2...@gm.mail.com (Peter James) wrote:
> >J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> >> Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
> >> The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> >> utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> >> have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
> >> Garbage snipped
> >I'm quite sure that they would have got, and expected, exactly the same
> >results to any survey run in the 1950,s through to the 1980's.
>
> >They ignore the fact that priestly abuse, is by its very nature
> >secretive and not something that the perpetrators scream from the
> >rooftops.
>
> >The Catholic Church surveying itself.  Why there's a surprise.
> >Peter
>
> Or atheists surveying themselves.
>
>

No.

PDW

[�RLMeasures]

In article <1l2uoja.1yip7rc5b6b78N%pfjam...@gm.mail.com>,

pfjam...@gm.mail.com (Peter James) wrote:

> J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
> >
> >
> >
> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to
> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.
> > Garbage snipped
> I'm quite sure that they would have got, and expected, exactly the same
> results to any survey run in the 1950,s through to the 1980's.
>
> They ignore the fact that priestly abuse, is by its very nature
> secretive and not something that the perpetrators scream from the
> rooftops.
>
> The Catholic Church surveying itself. Why there's a surprise.
>

� indeed Peter

[duke]

On Tue, 14 May 2013 03:49:11 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

Of course. I learned to read in the 1st grade.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <3gm4p8tv947rkqrag...@4ax.com>, duke

� maybe it's time for a review?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <3gm4p8tv947rkqrag...@4ax.com>,

Yeah, but you apparently never learned to think.

[Paul Duca]

> > Yes, extensively truthful and full of hot coeds.

>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> You misspelled 'lying', Dork.
>

All that interests Duke...

Paul

[duke]

Why? God's Word hasn't changed.

[duke]

On Tue, 14 May 2013 16:35:33 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

You clearly never learned to comprehend.

[�RLMeasures]

In article <h3r6p89pcjmcv4irk...@4ax.com>, duke

� reading review.

[Paul Duca]

No...just the simple-minded assumption it will solve ALL our problems for us.


Paul

[duke]

I rest my case.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <9a463436-3635-42bf...@googlegroups.com>, Paul
Duca <paul....@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 8:19:59 AM UTC-4, =E2=80=A2RLMeasures wrote:
> > In article <h3r6p89pcjmcv4irk...@4ax.com>, duke

> >=20
> > <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > > On Tue, 14 May 2013 09:11:37 -0700, r...@somis.org (=EF=BF=BDRLMeasures) w=
> rote:
> >=20
> > >=20
> >=20

> > > >In article <3gm4p8tv947rkqrag...@4ax.com>, duke

> >=20
> > > ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >
> >=20

> > > >> On Tue, 14 May 2013 03:49:11 -0700, Jeanne Douglas

> >=20
> > <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> >=20
> > > >> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >>=20
> >=20
> > > >> >In article <r954p8t5irsdguu6f...@4ax.com>,
> >=20
> > > >> > duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >> >
> >=20

> > > >> >> On Mon, 13 May 2013 15:07:21 -0700, Jeanne Douglas

> >=20
> > > ><hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> >=20
> > > >> >> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >> >>=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> >In article <qnj1p8hgtkdg5gufc...@4ax.com>,
> >=20
> > > >> >> > duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >> >> >
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> On Sun, 12 May 2013 17:31:25 -0700, Jeanne Douglas=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >> >> >>=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >In article=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> ><d61a7991-dfa6-4946...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups=
> .com>,
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> > "Syd M." <pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >> On May 12, 7:42=EF=BF=BDpm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the Un=
> ited
> >=20
> > > >States
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual a=
> buse:
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >> >
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University=
> ,
> >=20
> > > >shows how
> >=20

> > > >> >> >> >> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church

> >=20
> > > >continues=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >> > to
> >=20

> > > >> >> >> >> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse.

> >=20
> > > >> >> >> >>=20
> >=20

> > > >> >> >> >> Burying your head in the sand will not make the problem go

> >=20
> > > >away, IBen.
> >=20
> > > >> >>=20
> >=20

> > > >> >> >> >Isn't Georgetown a Catholic university?

> >=20
> > > >> >> >> Yes, extensively truthful.
> >=20
> > > >> >>=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> >And, of course, you don't care about the appearance of conflict =
> of=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> >interest, as long as you get the answers you want. Truth be dam=
> ned.
> >=20
> > > >> >>=20
> >=20
> > > >> >> Most of the conflict of interest comes from the likes of you. Af=
> ter
> >=20
> > > >all, the
> >=20

> > > >> >> RCC is charged with truth.

> >=20
> > > >> >
> >=20

> > > >> >Did that actually mean something to you when you typed it?

> >=20
> > > >>=20
> >=20

> > > >> Of course. I learned to read in the 1st grade.

> >=20
> > > >>=20
> >=20
> > > >=EF=BF=BD maybe it's time for a review?
> >=20
> > >=20
> >=20

> > > Why? God's Word hasn't changed.

> >=20
>
>
> No...just the simple-minded assumption it will solve ALL our problems for u=
> s.
>
>
• I did not write that Paul D,

[•RLMeasures]

In article <aic7p85r11404h876...@4ax.com>, duke

• You need to do a better job of reading responces,

[duke]

No need to do a better job of reading responces [sic]. My case is already made.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <44f9p8lifv9ts5dmb...@4ax.com>, duke

• why ? - your rather unique reading is not to be found the text of the
Ten Commandments.

[duke]

Forget the text. God said "do/do not" do this. Only a fool or a liar thinks
God doesn't matter - eternally

[Paul Duca]

Why is it all right for us not to matter to God - eternally?

Paul

[•RLMeasures]

In article <qbk9p8ppoiec796qn...@4ax.com>, duke

• God said or Moses said?

[Dreamer In Colore]

You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.

As for forgetting the text, are you actually claiming that the words
of the Bible themselves have no meaning? Because that's a rather
abrupt about-face that you've demonstrated...

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[duke]

God.

[duke]

On Thu, 16 May 2013 23:52:32 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>> No need to do a better job of reading responces [sic]. My case is
>>>already made.
>>
>>>• why ? - your rather unique reading is not to be found the text of the
>>>Ten Commandments.
>>
>>Forget the text. God said "do/do not" do this. Only a fool or a liar thinks
>>God doesn't matter - eternally

>You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
>another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
>them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.

Steal where?? What steal?

>As for forgetting the text, are you actually claiming that the words
>of the Bible themselves have no meaning? Because that's a rather
>abrupt about-face that you've demonstrated...

Strawman.

>Cheers,
>Dreamer
>AA 2306

[Devils Advocaat]

On 13 May, 13:13, Devils Advocaat <mankygo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 13 May, 00:42, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Bill Donohue comments on the 2012 Annual Report by the United States
> > Conference of Catholic Bishops on the subject of sexual abuse:
>
> > The survey, done by an institute at Georgetown University, shows how
> > utterly absurd it is to maintain that the Catholic Church continues to

> > have a problem with priestly sexual abuse. Of the nearly 40,000
> > priests in the U.S., there were 34 allegations made by minors last
> > year (32 priests, two deacons): six were deemed credible by law
> > enforcement; 12 were either unfounded or unable to be proven; one was
> > a boundary violation ; and 15 are still being probed. Moreover, in
> > every case brought to the attention of the bishops or heads of
> > religious orders, the civil authorities were notified.
>
> > Not counting those of unknown status, in 88 percent of the total
> > number of cases (independent of when they allegedly occurred), the
> > accused priest is either deceased, has been dismissed from ministry,
> > or has been laicized.
>
> > Most of the allegations reported to church officials today have
> > nothing to do with current cases: two-thirds date back to the 1960s,
> > 1970s and the first half of the 1980s. As usual, the problem is not
> > pedophilia: 19 percent of the allegations involving those who work in
> > dioceses or eparchies, and 7 percent of religious order priests and
> > deacons, involve pedophilia. In other words, the problem remains what
> > it has always been an issue involving homosexual priests (85 percent
> > of the victims were male).
>
> > Anyone who knows of any religious, or secular, organization that has
> > less of a problem with the sexual abuse of minors these days should
> > contact the Catholic League. We d love to match numbers.
>
> > One more thing: since nearly 100 percent of our priests did not have a
> > credible allegation made against him last year, this should be picked
> > up by the media. But it won t be. Look for the story to get buried.
>
> > J Young
> > jdyou...@ymail.com
>
> > Honesty. Decency. Integrity
>
> Open your eyes.
>
> There have been incidents.
>
> That in itself is a crisis.
>
> Priests should abstain.
>
> It's in the rules.
>
> Those who can't.
>
> Should leave.
>
> Hand themselves to the police.
>
> Admit their crime.
>
> And accept due punishment.

Hmm, no answer, I wonder why?

[•RLMeasures]

In article <940cp893hhnr5udfl...@4ax.com>, duke

• who wrote it down the first time?

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:05:48 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 16 May 2013 23:52:32 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> No need to do a better job of reading responces [sic]. My case is
>>>>already made.
>>>
>>>>• why ? - your rather unique reading is not to be found the text of the
>>>>Ten Commandments.
>>>
>>>Forget the text. God said "do/do not" do this. Only a fool or a liar thinks
>>>God doesn't matter - eternally
>
>>You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
>>another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
>>them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.
>
>Steal where?? What steal?
>

This is what I said in the thread where you introduced that elemental
sulphur nonsense, and that was just yesterday. Is your memory so
faulty that you can't even remember what you said 24 hours ago?


"Well, discoveryupdate.com is definitely the original source of your
quote, regardless of where you stole it. And steal it you definitely
did, because you've got the exact same capitalizations as at least six
other websites:

https://www.google.ca/#sclient=psy-ab&q=%22THROUGHOUT+the+sites+are+very+unusual+balls%22&oq=%22THROUGHOUT+the+sites+are+very+unusual+balls%22&gs_l=hp.3...7373.12183.1.13576.18.18.0.0.0.2.179.1755.14j4.18.0...0.0...1c.1.12.psy-ab.iSok5No40oE&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.46471029,d.aWM&fp=bac4c29db4487947&biw=1920&bih=1115

So... it's interesting to note how you ducked the issue of you
stealing the words of others. That's called lying, Dork..."

>>As for forgetting the text, are you actually claiming that the words
>>of the Bible themselves have no meaning? Because that's a rather
>>abrupt about-face that you've demonstrated...
>
>Strawman.
>

Thank you for pointing out that you still have no idea what the
strawman fallacy is, Dorkster.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[•RLMeasures]

In article <4vdcp85u3qj9cl359...@4ax.com>,

• he calls 'em "white lies".

[duke]

[duke]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 10:00:05 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
>>>another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
>>>them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.
>>Steal where?? What steal?

>This is what I said in the thread where you introduced that elemental
>sulphur nonsense, and that was just yesterday. Is your memory so
>faulty that you can't even remember what you said 24 hours ago?

Where's the theft?

>So... it's interesting to note how you ducked the issue of you
>stealing the words of others. That's called lying, Dork..."

I didn't.

>>>As for forgetting the text, are you actually claiming that the words
>>>of the Bible themselves have no meaning? Because that's a rather
>>>abrupt about-face that you've demonstrated...
>>Strawman.
>Thank you for pointing out that you still have no idea what the
>strawman fallacy is, Dorkster.

You got nailed once again. You're just chockablock full of strawmen. In fact,
it's your strongest characteristic.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <rdcdp811du1l5tpkf...@4ax.com>, duke

• that's not what the OT indicates.

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 17:42:46 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 May 2013 10:00:05 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
>>>>another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
>>>>them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.
>>>Steal where?? What steal?
>
>>This is what I said in the thread where you introduced that elemental
>>sulphur nonsense, and that was just yesterday. Is your memory so
>>faulty that you can't even remember what you said 24 hours ago?
>
>Where's the theft?

Once again, you snipped the part where I explained it. I'll include it
again for you, because you're getting older and clearly your memory is
impaired.

It started two days ago (15/5/2013) with your response to Magpie:

-----------------
ghOn Tue, 14 May 2013 15:00:35 +0100, The Magpie
<use...@pigsinspace.com> wrote:

>On 14/05/2013 12:51, duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 May 2013 15:09:56 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> It all started before the volcanoes took out Sodom and Ghomorrah.
>>>
>>> What volcanoes would those be?
>>
>> The ones that took out Sodom and Ghomorrah.

>All that.... in a non-volcanic region?

Highly pure sulphur. THROUGHOUT the sites are very unusual balls of
pure
elemental sulfur. The Bible states "...the LORD rained upon Sodom and
upon
Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven." (Gen 19:24)

The dukester, American - American

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

Do you see where you capitalized "THROUGHOUT" and "LORD"?

That's what you stole... because exactly the same capitalization is
used on at least six different websites, all originating from
discoveryupdate.com.

If you didn't steal it directly from there, you stole it from
somewhere...

And for the record... here's what you snipped:

"Well, discoveryupdate.com is definitely the original source of your
quote, regardless of where you stole it. And steal it you definitely
did, because you've got the exact same capitalizations as at least six
other websites:

https://www.google.ca/#sclient=psy-ab&q=%22THROUGHOUT+the+sites+are+very+unusual+balls%22&oq=%22THROUGHOUT+the+sites+are+very+unusual+balls%22&gs_l=hp.3...7373.12183.1.13576.18.18.0.0.0.2.179.1755.14j4.18.0...0.0...1c.1.12.psy-ab.iSok5No40oE&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.46471029,d.aWM&fp=bac4c29db4487947&biw=1920&bih=1115


>

>>So... it's interesting to note how you ducked the issue of you
>>stealing the words of others. That's called lying, Dork..."
>
>I didn't.

Oh you absolutely did.

>
>>>>As for forgetting the text, are you actually claiming that the words
>>>>of the Bible themselves have no meaning? Because that's a rather
>>>>abrupt about-face that you've demonstrated...
>>>Strawman.
>>Thank you for pointing out that you still have no idea what the
>>strawman fallacy is, Dorkster.
>
>You got nailed once again. You're just chockablock full of strawmen. In fact,
>it's your strongest characteristic.
>

No strawman here, Dork. I caught you in a bold-faced lie. You stole
someone else's words and pasted them without attribution. That's
stealing... and then you lied about doing it.

Guess where you're going, Dorkster.... straight to your fiery pit for
violating two of the commandments.

How're you feeling now, Dork?

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[duke]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 16:44:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:


>> >> >> >� why ? - your rather unique reading is not to be found the text

>of the
>> >> >> >Ten Commandments.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Forget the text. God said "do/do not" do this. Only a fool or a
>> >liar thinks
>> >> >> God doesn't matter - eternally
>> >> >>
>> >> >� God said or Moses said?
>> >>
>> >> God.
>> >>
>> >� who wrote it down the first time?
>>
>> God.
>>
>� that's not what the OT indicates.

Read it again.

[duke]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 22:22:27 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
>>>>>another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
>>>>>them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.
>>>>Steal where?? What steal?

>>>This is what I said in the thread where you introduced that elemental
>>>sulphur nonsense, and that was just yesterday. Is your memory so
>>>faulty that you can't even remember what you said 24 hours ago?

>>Where's the theft?

>Once again, you snipped the part where I explained it. I'll include it
>again for you, because you're getting older and clearly your memory is
>impaired.

Can you read?? Where's the theft?

>"Well, discoveryupdate.com is definitely the original source of your
>quote

Never was. Still isn't.

The dukester, American - American

[•RLMeasures]

In article <gnnep8lljbhgbra03...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 17 May 2013 16:44:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>
>
> >> >> >> >• why ? - your rather unique reading is not to be found the text
> >of the
> >> >> >> >Ten Commandments.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Forget the text. God said "do/do not" do this. Only a fool or a
> >> >liar thinks
> >> >> >> God doesn't matter - eternally
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >• God said or Moses said?
> >> >>
> >> >> God.
> >> >>
> >> >• who wrote it down the first time?
> >>
> >> God.
> >>
> >• that's not what the OT indicates.
>
> Read it again.
>

• the Duke dodge.

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 06:01:48 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 May 2013 22:22:27 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
>>>>>>another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
>>>>>>them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.
>>>>>Steal where?? What steal?
>
>>>>This is what I said in the thread where you introduced that elemental
>>>>sulphur nonsense, and that was just yesterday. Is your memory so
>>>>faulty that you can't even remember what you said 24 hours ago?
>
>>>Where's the theft?
>
>>Once again, you snipped the part where I explained it. I'll include it
>>again for you, because you're getting older and clearly your memory is
>>impaired.
>
>Can you read?? Where's the theft?
>

Seriously, Dork... you have the same words capitalized in the same
sentences in the exact same order as those appearing on
discoveryupdate.com. Are you actually going to continue claiming that
you are the originator of those words?

You're a liar. Simple as that.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[•RLMeasures]

In article <02uep892ddjk4r9qc...@4ax.com>,

• Our Duke never backs down when he get's caught.

[Dreamer In Colore]

It's ok. We'll soon move his nickname from Dork to Liar. It's pathetic
that he can't be a man about it, and the irony is thick around it,
like the layer of Nuggets he gluttonously consumes.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[•RLMeasures]

In article <46ffp8ll5eml9tatr...@4ax.com>,

• Maybe he has a dispensation that allows gluttony because of his
devotion to defending pedo-priests?

[Dreamer In Colore]

Maybe the more calumny he spews, the more Nuggets he's allowed. It's
kinda Pavlovian, no?

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[linuxgal]

Dreamer In Colore wrote:
> Maybe the more calumny he spews, the more Nuggets he's allowed. It's
> kinda Pavlovian, no?

That does ring a bell.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[�RLMeasures]

In article <i4qfp8td5gu3ckrac...@4ax.com>,

� maybe but the guy in the photo must weigh c. 300lbs, so that's obviously
more than a couple of Nuggets per day like he claims.

[duke]

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:48:02 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 18 May 2013 06:01:48 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 May 2013 22:22:27 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>You've already broken one commandment by stealing the words of
>>>>>>>another, Dork. You probably coveted them, which is why you stole
>>>>>>>them... so that's two commandments you just blithely ignored.
>>>>>>Steal where?? What steal?
>>
>>>>>This is what I said in the thread where you introduced that elemental
>>>>>sulphur nonsense, and that was just yesterday. Is your memory so
>>>>>faulty that you can't even remember what you said 24 hours ago?
>>
>>>>Where's the theft?
>>
>>>Once again, you snipped the part where I explained it. I'll include it
>>>again for you, because you're getting older and clearly your memory is
>>>impaired.
>>
>>Can you read?? Where's the theft?
>>
>
>Seriously, Dork... you have the same words capitalized in the same
>sentences in the exact same order as those appearing on
>discoveryupdate.com.

Great, but seriously, I never heard of your site before this.

>Are you actually going to continue claiming that
>you are the originator of those words?

Of course not. But not from your site (discoveryupdate.com?).

>You're a liar. Simple as that.

Nope, simple as that.

>Cheers,
>Dreamer
>AA 2306

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:18 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

Heeheehee. You can't stand the truth, can you, rl?

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:18 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 13:39:18 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Oops. Grik.

>Cheers,
>Dreamer
>AA 2306

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 16:47:30 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

Well, any lies I tell are white lies, so my daily allocation of 2-3 nuggets a
day still stands.

>
>Cheers,
>Dreamer
>AA 2306

[duke]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 14:03:37 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>Dreamer In Colore wrote:
>> Maybe the more calumny he spews, the more Nuggets he's allowed. It's
>> kinda Pavlovian, no?
>
>That does ring a bell.

Yep, you dogs do that.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <smohp8h5kl1oujg0b...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 May 2013 05:34:03 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <gnnep8lljbhgbra03...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 17 May 2013 16:44:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >> >> >> >• why ? - your rather unique reading is not to be found the text
> >> >of the
> >> >> >> >> >Ten Commandments.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Forget the text. God said "do/do not" do this. Only a fool or a
> >> >> >liar thinks
> >> >> >> >> God doesn't matter - eternally
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >• God said or Moses said?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> God.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >• who wrote it down the first time?
> >> >>
> >> >> God.
> >> >>
> >> >• that's not what the OT indicates.
> >>
> >> Read it again.
> >>
> >• the Duke dodge.
>
> Read it again.
>

• Which of the books in the OT were written by the RC Jesus/God?

[Dreamer In Colore]

Nice try, Dorkster. Would have been fine if you'd attributed your
source... but you still lie about it. Not much that comes out of your
mouth can be trusted because you're not straight about anything at
all.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[duke]

God gave Moses the 10 commandments written on tablets of stone. You attempt to
change the subject is rejected.

[duke]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:54:34 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about anything.

[Syd M.]

On May 19, 1:08 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:54:34 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <dreamerincol...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >On Sun, 19 May 2013 09:37:28 -0500, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >>On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:48:02 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

> >><dreamerincol...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Dork's entire posting history says otherwise.

PDW

[Syd M.]

On May 19, 1:07 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 08:09:20 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:

> >In article <smohp8h5kl1oujg0b26qp603u46qg4v...@4ax.com>, duke

> ><duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> On Sat, 18 May 2013 05:34:03 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>

> >> >In article <gnnep8lljbhgbra039i2jt31c94kpia...@4ax.com>, duke

> >> ><duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> On Fri, 17 May 2013 16:44:35 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >•  why ? - your rather unique reading is not to be found the text
> >> >> >of the
> >> >> >> >> >> >Ten Commandments.
>
> >> >> >> >> >> Forget the text.  God said "do/do not" do this.  Only a fool or a
> >> >> >> >liar thinks
> >> >> >> >> >> God doesn't matter - eternally
>
> >> >> >> >> >•  God said or Moses said?
>
> >> >> >> >> God.
>
> >> >> >> >•  who wrote it down the first time?
>
> >> >> >> God.
>
> >> >> >•  that's not what the OT indicates.
>
> >> >> Read it again.
>
> >> >•  the Duke dodge.
>
> >> Read it again.
>
> >•  Which of the books in the OT were written by the RC Jesus/God?
>
> God gave Moses the 10 commandments written on tablets of stone.

Empty assertion.
PROVE it, Dork.

PDW

[Dreamer In Colore]

Your entire faith is a lie. Your statement of following a message of
love is a lie. You stole passages wholesale from a website, and then
lied about it.

You're a bush-league liar, Dork. You aren't even man enough to accept
it and try to improve yourself.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[•RLMeasures]

In article <3j1ip8pd8rbj23875...@4ax.com>, duke

• Change the subject? Who wrote what when is still the subject.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <9n1ip8hn7vrcfq48b...@4ax.com>,

You mean, for example, when you claim y our god never killed anybody?

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[duke]

The 10 commandments is the subject of the top line of this post.

[duke]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:00:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

>>You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about anything.

>Your entire faith is a lie.

Nah, you just don't want to accept it. 2.2 billion people alive and well today
can't be wrong. That you wish to is not my concern.

> Your statement of following a message of
>love is a lie. You stole passages wholesale from a website, and then
>lied about it.

You have a totally blank data base on what I do. Quit lying.

>You're a bush-league liar, Dork. You aren't even man enough to accept
>it and try to improve yourself.

As long as I'm so far ahead of you, I'm not worried. I have never lied on the
ng, don't now, never will. That you are so challenged to truth and reality is
your problem , not mine.

[duke]

On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:02:02 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

That's right. For every man that every died at the hands of someone, it's 100%
at the hands of other men. But never God.

And I defy you to show otherwise.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <mv2lp8lr9487dtite...@4ax.com>,

So god didn't kill every human on the planet except Noah and his family?

So god didn't kill all the first-born of Egypt?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <uo2lp85l80o46o7gs...@4ax.com>,

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:00:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>
> >>You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about
> >>anything.
>
> >Your entire faith is a lie.
>
> Nah, you just don't want to accept it. 2.2 billion people alive and well
> today
> can't be wrong. That you wish to is not my concern.

There's yet another lie.

There are not 2.2 billion Catholics in the world. Not even close.

[Dakota]

On 5/20/2013 5:10 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <uo2lp85l80o46o7gs...@4ax.com>,
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:00:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>>
>>>> You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about
>>>> anything.
>>
>>> Your entire faith is a lie.
>>
>> Nah, you just don't want to accept it. 2.2 billion people alive and well
>> today
>> can't be wrong. That you wish to is not my concern.
>
> There's yet another lie.
>
> There are not 2.2 billion Catholics in the world. Not even close.
>

Even if there were that many, they can all be wrong.

[Syd M.]

On May 20, 4:48 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:02:02 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <9n1ip8hn7vrcfq48beafcak5p34bj81...@4ax.com>,

> > duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> On Sun, 19 May 2013 12:54:34 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

> >> <dreamerincol...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> >> >On Sun, 19 May 2013 09:37:28 -0500, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> >>On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:48:02 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

> >> >><dreamerincol...@hotmail.com> wrote:

So, the flood myth totaled no body then?

PDW

[Syd M.]

On May 20, 4:47 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:00:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>
> >>You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about anything.
> >Your entire faith is a lie.
>
> Nah, you just don't want to accept it.  2.2 billion people alive and well today
> can't be wrong.  That you wish to is not my concern.
>
> > Your statement of following a message of
> >love is a lie. You stole passages wholesale from a website, and then
> >lied about it.
>
> You have a totally blank data base on what I do.  Quit lying.
>
> >You're a bush-league liar, Dork. You aren't even man enough to accept
> >it and try to improve yourself.
>
> As long as I'm so far ahead of you, I'm not worried.

No, of course your not. Your smug, arrogonat absuiridty will admit no
mistake.

PDW

[%]

just cut to the chase and call him a liar will ya ,
you know that's where you're going anyway

[�RLMeasures]

In article <jn2lp8poph74nt1pi...@4ax.com>, duke

� nada

[Paul Duca]

> will increase a hundredfold in Catholic Heaven.

[duke]

Yep.

[duke]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:10:47 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

>In article <uo2lp85l80o46o7gs...@4ax.com>,
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:00:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>>
>> >>You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about
>> >>anything.
>>
>> >Your entire faith is a lie.
>>
>> Nah, you just don't want to accept it. 2.2 billion people alive and well
>> today
>> can't be wrong. That you wish to is not my concern.
>
>There's yet another lie.
>
>There are not 2.2 billion Catholics in the world. Not even close.

I didn't say Catholics. It's Christians who profess "Jesus is Lord".

Just how challenged are you?

[duke]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:08:53 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

Good grief. Here we go again. How many people did God kill in the flood?

>So god didn't kill all the first-born of Egypt?

The FOG.

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:47:41 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:00:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>
>>>You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about anything.
>
>>Your entire faith is a lie.
>
>Nah, you just don't want to accept it. 2.2 billion people alive and well today
>can't be wrong. That you wish to is not my concern.
>

Got some independent verification for that number, Dorkster? If that
figure were true, then Catholicism would be the world's number one
religion... which it isn't.

You're probably thinking about Christianity in general... but who
knows what lie you'll come up with next?

Also, you're entirely wrong about how many people can be wrong about
something. Before Copernicus, the entire planet thought the world was
flat.

>> Your statement of following a message of
>>love is a lie. You stole passages wholesale from a website, and then
>>lied about it.
>
>You have a totally blank data base on what I do. Quit lying.
>

Ah, Dorkster... you couldn't be more wrong. I archive every single
post in this newsgroup to be able to refer to every single idiocy
that's left your fingertips. It's many thousands of posts... many many
many lies that you've uttered.

>>You're a bush-league liar, Dork. You aren't even man enough to accept
>>it and try to improve yourself.
>
>As long as I'm so far ahead of you, I'm not worried. I have never lied on the
>ng, don't now, never will. That you are so challenged to truth and reality is
>your problem , not mine.
>

I already caught you in a lie about attribution. Lots of other people
have caught you in abundant lies over the years. I don't know why you
bother to refute this: it's self-evident, and your name is becoming
synonymous with Liar.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[•RLMeasures]

In article <fromp8tou5i7qia70...@4ax.com>, duke

• The laugher is that there are other organized religions that permit
lying, Islam being one of them.

[duke]

These others disregard the 10 commandments.

[duke]

On Tue, 21 May 2013 08:37:40 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
<dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:47:41 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 19 May 2013 16:00:46 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>>
>>>>You cannot, no matter how hard you try, find where I have lied about anything.
>>
>>>Your entire faith is a lie.
>>
>>Nah, you just don't want to accept it. 2.2 billion people alive and well today
>>can't be wrong. That you wish to is not my concern.

>Got some independent verification for that number, Dorkster? If that
>figure were true, then Catholicism would be the world's number one
>religion... which it isn't.

Christianity.

>You're probably thinking about Christianity in general... but who
>knows what lie you'll come up with next?

My entire faith is 2.2 billion strong, dummy grik.

>Also, you're entirely wrong about how many people can be wrong about
>something. Before Copernicus, the entire planet thought the world was
>flat.

No basis for controversy.

>>> Your statement of following a message of
>>>love is a lie. You stole passages wholesale from a website, and then
>>>lied about it.
>>
>>You have a totally blank data base on what I do. Quit lying.

>Ah, Dorkster... you couldn't be more wrong. I archive every single
>post in this newsgroup to be able to refer to every single idiocy
>that's left your fingertips. It's many thousands of posts... many many
>many lies that you've uttered.

Zero. And you can book it.

>>>You're a bush-league liar, Dork. You aren't even man enough to accept
>>>it and try to improve yourself.
>>
>>As long as I'm so far ahead of you, I'm not worried. I have never lied on the
>>ng, don't now, never will. That you are so challenged to truth and reality is
>>your problem , not mine.

>I already caught you in a lie about attribution.

No you didn't. A lie is a deliberate fabrication. YOU LIE.

[Les]

What, are you wanting us to prove that the Bible is not
lying when it claimed its wannahave god murdered
all the first born of Egypt and the entire population
of Sodom and Gomorrah?

Are you also wanting us to prove it threw
Adam and Eve out of the garden of Eden due
to some 'original sin' and that the same wannahave god
created everything in six days?

No way Duke you can do your own proving
since we do no even believe there is
a god to have done any of these things but will
instead defy you to show that your RCC sect
is also other than 100% human along with all
the killings it did in the name of its wannahave god.

--
Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"When you are in a crowd and you stand out from the
crowd it's ususually because you are being carried on
the shoulders of others."
- Desmond Tutu

[�RLMeasures]

In article <5i7np8he30jfb3tp8...@4ax.com>, duke

� With any luck, someday Duke may actually read the Ten Commandments.

[•RLMeasures]

In article <5i7np8he30jfb3tp8...@4ax.com>, duke

• Muslims don't need the Ten Commandments because the Qur'an has got 'em
built in and it's way more recent than the Bible. .

[Dreamer In Colore]

Dork doesn't care about the proving of religion. He wants us to prove
that he has lied in this newsgroup. My only difficulty is figuring out
what the arbitrary limit ought to be... 5 lies, 10 lies, 15?

There are just so many Dork has done over the years.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[Dreamer In Colore]

It's obvious that he's read them. It's also obvious that he thinks
that they don't apply to him. Apparently the word "hypocrisy" hasn't
crossed what passes for his mind.

Cheers,
Dreamer
AA 2306

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <m1pmp8llojfrrfk20...@4ax.com>,

What fog?