hello
GT
of these
posts, I feel like I should buy a nice kevlar vest before checking any
responses
to this post.
I too, support the death penalty, and though I'm not a flag waving, fry-em
kind of gal, I believe that to deny state sponsored death to a select group
of murders who through their cold-blooded amoral actions show that they
clearly have no redeeming value would be a travesty.
Geena
JIGSAW1695
From: "GT" gina...@yahoo.com
Date: 11/9/2002 8:51 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
Geena
===============================
Welcome aboard Geena!
Beware or troll such as Dezi and Jurgen. They will dis you in a heartbeat
because of what you believe in.
A Planet Visitor
"GT" <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com...
Quite right. Although you can expect some sexist comment from
ol' ironhead - desi. To me -- Morality is all in the 'eye of the beholder,'
and there are two views of morality in respect to the DP. The view
of some abolitionists who view the DP as a moral issue, is that it
seems moral to keep EVERY murderer alive, to breath the same
air, and dream pleasantly of their past murders, until they expire
peacefully with a smile on their face. I cannot fault an abolitionist
for holding such a subjective morality viewpoint. But, by the same
token, the view of many retentionists (myself among them), is
that it is somehow immoral to presume we must keep EVERY
murderer alive, to breath the same air, and dream pleasantly of
their past murders, until they expire peacefully with a smile on their
face.
Where I do take offense is when an abolitionist, or a retentionist,
presumes that the subjective morality view of the DP, of those
holding a contrary viewpoint, is somehow immoral by definition.
desi is one of those I speak of, believing that ALL retentionists
must hold an immoral viewpoint, simply because THEY ARE
retentionists. I certainly don't consider the idea of abolition to
be immoral by definition. Although I do consider desi to be
immoral for believing all retentionists are immoral (I find it to
be a rather bigoted viewpoint).
Thus, it seems to me, that the very idea of JUDGING the morality
of another, in respect to the DP, as it exists in the U.S. today,
is itself immoral. Regardless of who presumes they may make
such a God-like judgment in respect to morality. In other words..
all are welcome to their 'opinion' regarding the 'morality' of the DP,
as it exists in the U.S. today, as long as they do not presume
that opinion means ALL OTHERS, holding a contrary view, are
immoral for believing as they do. IMHO.
PV
> Geena
>
>
>
Jürgen
GT schrieb in Nachricht ...
Hi and welcome Geena,
a capital punishment which is grossly reserved for those who can not afford
a reasonable defense at trial has nothing to do with arguments like 'now
this one really deserves it' or 'society's protection'.
So long
Jürgen
Incubus
Welcome Geena. Are you carrying any offensive weapons such as firearms,
stabbing weapons or chemical agents? no? well you better take this then
<hands Geena a GPMG> you could get hurt in there
Richard J
Now, Jürgen.
Geena, be aware that Jürgen Hartwig is a German Liberal who believes
anyone can be turned into a productive citizen if just we can understand
and properly council them. His principle attacks against the death
penalty are the one you see above and another. Next, he will hit you
with argument that the average nine years wait on death row is a form of
torture and as such is cruel and unusual. This despite the fact that
the reason some waits to execution are lengthy is caused by actions of
the defendant's lawyers in appeals.
He would have you think that every capital murderer who uses public
defenders is poorly represented and that the lengthy appeals process
which takes years is totally ineffective.
I think that about sums it up.
Teflon (Richard Jackson)
Oh yes, a claim of most abolitionist here, Jürgen included, is that we
have
Jürgen
Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DCE6D0E...@hotmail.com>...
Well, I think Geena is capable to make her own perceptions and decisions
what I am and for what I stand.
Had you paid attention to my posts then you'd know that I quite well deem a
small percentage of criminals too dangerous to make a reintegrative attempt
in general society.
His principle attacks against the death
>penalty are the one you see above and another. Next, he will hit you
>with argument that the average nine years wait on death row is a form of
>torture and as such is cruel and unusual. This despite the fact that
>the reason some waits to execution are lengthy is caused by actions of
>the defendant's lawyers in appeals.
AFAIK alot of the innocents found on death row had been not exonerated by
the first, i.e. the mandatory appeal, Mr Jackson.
>
>He would have you think that every capital murderer who uses public
>defenders is poorly represented and that the lengthy appeals process
>which takes years is totally ineffective.
Well, Richard, the situation is that the appeals do not proceed
automatically - they depend upon PERSONAL resources not less than the
defense in the original trial, since the whole appears to be a kind of
waiting of the entire official (pro-execution-)complex whether the opposite
side were capable of presenting the case in a sufficiently professional way.
I call this modus operandi not too effective neither in respect to innocents
on death row nor in respect to unconstitutional death sentences. I call this
procedere dangerous, since the finding of the truth depends upon whether
private persons are willing to pay the convicted's further defense.
>
>I think that about sums it up.
I think you should speak for yourself and present your argument, Richard,
instead of to hand out a distorted modification of my opinion.
>
>Oh yes, a claim of most abolitionist here, Jürgen included, is that we
>have
Have what?
J.
Incubus
<snip>
This is Desi. He is a funny and likeable person for the most part but he has
a bitter and twisted side. If you know something he doesn't he will hunt you
down like a dog and try to discredit you. Don't let that bother you, most of
the time he is a decent chap
:-)
Richard J
I just wanted to give her a little head start rather than having to read
through your sometimes long and confusing posts, Jürgen. That's no slap
against you. English is not your first language, and although you do
quite well in it, the fact shows in your English usage.
> Had you paid attention to my posts then you'd know that I quite well deem a
> small percentage of criminals too dangerous to make a reintegrative attempt
> in general society.
>
> His principle attacks against the death
> >penalty are the one you see above and another. Next, he will hit you
> >with argument that the average nine years wait on death row is a form of
> >torture and as such is cruel and unusual. This despite the fact that
> >the reason some waits to execution are lengthy is caused by actions of
> >the defendant's lawyers in appeals.
>
> AFAIK alot of the innocents found on death row had been not exonerated by
> the first, i.e. the mandatory appeal, Mr Jackson.
That's true Jürgen. That first appeal is primarily to determine the
trial is properly carried out. Subsequent appeals and writs have other
purposes, and are filed by the defendant or his attorneys.
>
> >
> >He would have you think that every capital murderer who uses public
> >defenders is poorly represented and that the lengthy appeals process
> >which takes years is totally ineffective.
>
> Well, Richard, the situation is that the appeals do not proceed
> automatically - they depend upon PERSONAL resources not less than the
> defense in the original trial,
That is an incorrect statement if you are speaking of just money. A
defendant themselves can file on their own behalf and often do. If you
are speaking of ALL of a person's personal resources, including his own
intelligence and steadfastness, then I agree. But then, that's true in
any trial.
since the whole appears to be a kind of
> waiting of the entire official (pro-execution-)complex whether the opposite
> side were capable of presenting the case in a sufficiently professional way.
> I call this modus operandi not too effective neither in respect to innocents
> on death row nor in respect to unconstitutional death sentences. I call this
> procedere dangerous, since the finding of the truth depends upon whether
> private persons are willing to pay the convicted's further defense.
It is true that a person capable of paying the best and biggest legal
teams can often get away with murder or about any other crime you can
name. I suspect that is as true in most European countries as here.
Wealth does have advantages, and that is one of them.
To automatically assume, as you seem to do, that all public defenders
are incompetent or such defense incomplete, is a disservice to those who
work in public defense. The main difference, IMO, is that people who
hire their own lawyer have a better chance of getting a good lawyer than
those who depend on public defenders. That doesn't, however, mean that
many, if not most public defenders are competent lawyers who do an
excellent job, nor that some privately hired lawyers are not too good at
their job.
> >
> >I think that about sums it up.
>
> I think you should speak for yourself and present your argument, Richard,
I have no problem speaking for myself, Jürgen. I have no intention of
letting some claims go by by abolitionist if I think they are wrong.
> instead of to hand out a distorted modification of my opinion.
I handed out my opinion of your attitude. If you don't like what I
think of you, too bad.
>
> >
> >Oh yes, a claim of most abolitionist here, Jürgen included, is that we
> >have
>
> Have what?
>
> J.
Executed innocents despite the fact that there has not been one case
where e a wrongful execution has been conclusively proven in the US
since the resumption of the death penalty.
Not one. And do not start that crap about there being no way to prove
innocence. You know as well as I that the real question is proof of
wrongful execution through new and conclusive evidence or the
irrefutable confession of a criminal to a murder. Where is it Jürgen?
Teflon
dirtdog
<snipped savage and frankly hilarous _thraping_ of PV>
> A classic example of this is when he
> claimed that dirtdog, the poster whom I mentioned above, is anti-
> Semitic. Now, dirtdog has made _one_ mention of Israel in the whole
> two or three years that he has been posting.
Let's be more specific here. PV has not just claimed that I am
anti-semitic, which I might possibly have indicated without
mentioning Israel. However, more precisely (and _child's play_ to
disprove), FW claimed that I have challenged Israel's legitimacy and right
to exist - which would be rather difficult for me to articulate without
mentioning the 'I' word.
A simple search of Google displayed for all to see that FW was talking
absolute shite, and I still should be obliged to hear upon what ground he
bases this nonsensical claim.
Of course, I feel that in the face of the clear fact that this was simply
a lie aimed to turn others against me (whose opinions he contends, as you
correctly point out, don't matter to him), and that he has clearly been
caught out, he wll simply claiming that he was 'just trolling'.
--
------------------------
w00f - dirtdog in France
dirtdog @ fruffrant.com
------------------------
Jürgen
Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DCEBAA1...@hotmail.com>...
No, this was not what you wanted. Read your text: "Geena, be aware that
Jürgen Hartwig is a German Liberal who believes anyone can be turned into a
productive citizen if just we can understand and properly council them."
Where and when I should have stated that *any* criminal can be resocialized?
>
>> Had you paid attention to my posts then you'd know that I quite well deem
a
>> small percentage of criminals too dangerous to make a reintegrative
attempt
>> in general society.
>>
>> His principle attacks against the death
>> >penalty are the one you see above and another. Next, he will hit you
>> >with argument that the average nine years wait on death row is a form of
>> >torture and as such is cruel and unusual. This despite the fact that
>> >the reason some waits to execution are lengthy is caused by actions of
>> >the defendant's lawyers in appeals.
>>
>> AFAIK alot of the innocents found on death row had been not exonerated by
>> the first, i.e. the mandatory appeal, Mr Jackson.
>
>That's true Jürgen. That first appeal is primarily to determine the
>trial is properly carried out. Subsequent appeals and writs have other
>purposes, and are filed by the defendant or his attorneys.
>
Well, to sit in a matchbox while having been stripped off of the right to
life from one's own society is psychological torture. Then you counter: 'Oh,
but that's the fault of the defense lawyers.' I now want to hear what any
innocent on death row IYO should do to avoid this torturous state. Should he
waiver his appeals or continue?
>>
>> >
>> >He would have you think that every capital murderer who uses public
>> >defenders is poorly represented and that the lengthy appeals process
>> >which takes years is totally ineffective.
>>
>> Well, Richard, the situation is that the appeals do not proceed
>> automatically - they depend upon PERSONAL resources not less than the
>> defense in the original trial,
>
>That is an incorrect statement if you are speaking of just money. A
>defendant themselves can file on their own behalf and often do. If you
>are speaking of ALL of a person's personal resources, including his own
>intelligence and steadfastness, then I agree. But then, that's true in
>any trial.
Well, let us stay on a reasonable plane. A prisoner will neither prove his
innocence nor get any appellate ruling on his behalf, for instant in due to
formerly neglected mitigating circumstances. The law is a matter of skilly
experts, and to prove innocence requires investigation - not inside but
outside of prison.
>
> since the whole appears to be a kind of
>> waiting of the entire official (pro-execution-)complex whether the
opposite
>> side were capable of presenting the case in a sufficiently professional
way.
>> I call this modus operandi not too effective neither in respect to
innocents
>> on death row nor in respect to unconstitutional death sentences. I call
this
>> procedere dangerous, since the finding of the truth depends upon whether
>> private persons are willing to pay the convicted's further defense.
>
>It is true that a person capable of paying the best and biggest legal
>teams can often get away with murder or about any other crime you can
>name. I suspect that is as true in most European countries as here.
>Wealth does have advantages, and that is one of them.
>
>To automatically assume, as you seem to do, that all public defenders
>are incompetent or such defense incomplete, is a disservice to those who
>work in public defense. The main difference, IMO, is that people who
>hire their own lawyer have a better chance of getting a good lawyer than
>those who depend on public defenders. That doesn't, however, mean that
>many, if not most public defenders are competent lawyers who do an
>excellent job, nor that some privately hired lawyers are not too good at
>their job.
The standard is pretty clear in the face of SCOTUS-justices who expressed
the opinion that a sleeping lawyer is no reason to declare the trial
invalid.
>> >
>> >I think that about sums it up.
>>
>> I think you should speak for yourself and present your argument, Richard,
>
>I have no problem speaking for myself, Jürgen. I have no intention of
>letting some claims go by by abolitionist if I think they are wrong.
>
>> instead of to hand out a distorted modification of my opinion.
>
>I handed out my opinion of your attitude. If you don't like what I
>think of you, too bad.
No. You stated nothing about my attitude, but gave an incomplete and
partially wrong synopsis of what you believe to be my argumentation.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Oh yes, a claim of most abolitionist here, Jürgen included, is that we
>> >have
>>
>> Have what?
>>
>> J.
>
>Executed innocents despite the fact that there has not been one case
>where e a wrongful execution has been conclusively proven in the US
>since the resumption of the death penalty.
>
>Not one. And do not start that crap about there being no way to prove
>innocence. You know as well as I that the real question is proof of
>wrongful execution through new and conclusive evidence or the
>irrefutable confession of a criminal to a murder. Where is it Jürgen?
>
My thesis is clear. I did never claim to hold evidence for an innocently
executed - I concluded from (a) lots of death-sentenced proven innocent
while on death row and from (b) the switch of the burden of proof after
trial to the situation that any innocent on death row who were unable to
prove his innocence to a high standard will be executed. Pretty clear.
J.
Richard J
Just my generalization of you, Jürgen. My opinion.
>
> >
> >> Had you paid attention to my posts then you'd know that I quite well deem
> a
> >> small percentage of criminals too dangerous to make a reintegrative
> attempt
> >> in general society.
> >>
> >> His principle attacks against the death
> >> >penalty are the one you see above and another. Next, he will hit you
> >> >with argument that the average nine years wait on death row is a form of
> >> >torture and as such is cruel and unusual. This despite the fact that
> >> >the reason some waits to execution are lengthy is caused by actions of
> >> >the defendant's lawyers in appeals.
> >>
> >> AFAIK alot of the innocents found on death row had been not exonerated by
> >> the first, i.e. the mandatory appeal, Mr Jackson.
> >
> >That's true Jürgen. That first appeal is primarily to determine the
> >trial is properly carried out. Subsequent appeals and writs have other
> >purposes, and are filed by the defendant or his attorneys.
> >
>
> Well, to sit in a matchbox while having been stripped off of the right to
> life from one's own society is psychological torture.
AH! At last we have it. Now that didn't take long, did it Jürgen?
Then you counter: 'Oh,
> but that's the fault of the defense lawyers.' I now want to hear what any
> innocent on death row IYO should do to avoid this torturous state. Should he
> waiver his appeals or continue?
I definitely think he should continue. The problem is that those who
know they are guilty as Hell also continue.
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >He would have you think that every capital murderer who uses public
> >> >defenders is poorly represented and that the lengthy appeals process
> >> >which takes years is totally ineffective.
> >>
> >> Well, Richard, the situation is that the appeals do not proceed
> >> automatically - they depend upon PERSONAL resources not less than the
> >> defense in the original trial,
> >
> >That is an incorrect statement if you are speaking of just money. A
> >defendant themselves can file on their own behalf and often do. If you
> >are speaking of ALL of a person's personal resources, including his own
> >intelligence and steadfastness, then I agree. But then, that's true in
> >any trial.
>
> Well, let us stay on a reasonable plane. A prisoner will neither prove his
> innocence nor get any appellate ruling on his behalf, for instant in due to
> formerly neglected mitigating circumstances.
Provided I under stand what you are saying, you are saying a prisoner
cannot use previously unmentioned mitigating circumstances to prove
reasonable doubt in an appeal. In fact, that is only partly correct.
If a defense lawyer is advised of mitigating circumstances or testimony
in disclosure prior to or during the trial and does not use them, they
are not admissible at a later date. If the prosecutor withholds
mitigating circumstances from the defense, not only can the defense use
them at a later date, but the entire trial can (and has been on
occasion) invalidated in appeals court and a new trial ordered.
The law is a matter of skilly (skilly? Try skillful)
> experts, and to prove innocence requires investigation - not inside but
> outside of prison.
It happens sometimes.
That is one case and is not a standard. There are also cases, many
cases in fact, where public defenders skillfully defended their clients
successfully, or helped them exonerate themselves in appeals. Let's
see, you claim over a hundred wrongfully convicted men were released
from death row, right? How many of those hundred were wealthy, and how
many had help from public sources?
>
> >> >
> >> >I think that about sums it up.
> >>
> >> I think you should speak for yourself and present your argument, Richard,
> >
> >I have no problem speaking for myself, Jürgen. I have no intention of
> >letting some claims go by by abolitionist if I think they are wrong.
> >
> >> instead of to hand out a distorted modification of my opinion.
> >
> >I handed out my opinion of your attitude. If you don't like what I
> >think of you, too bad.
>
> No. You stated nothing about my attitude, but gave an incomplete and
> partially wrong synopsis of what you believe to be my argumentation.
Wrong in your opinion, not in mine.
>
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Oh yes, a claim of most abolitionist here, Jürgen included, is that we
> >> >have
> >>
> >> Have what?
> >>
> >> J.
> >
> >Executed innocents despite the fact that there has not been one case
> >where e a wrongful execution has been conclusively proven in the US
> >since the resumption of the death penalty.
> >
> >Not one. And do not start that crap about there being no way to prove
> >innocence. You know as well as I that the real question is proof of
> >wrongful execution through new and conclusive evidence or the
> >irrefutable confession of a criminal to a murder. Where is it Jürgen?
> >
>
> My thesis is clear. I did never claim to hold evidence for an innocently
> executed - I concluded from (a) lots of death-sentenced proven innocent
> while on death row and from (b) the switch of the burden of proof after
> trial to the situation that any innocent on death row who were unable to
> prove his innocence to a high standard will be executed. Pretty clear.
>
> J.
Prove it.
Teflon
A Planet Visitor
has attempted to 'justify' his behavior here.
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net...
le Sun, 10 Nov 2002 01:51:31 GMT, dans l'article <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>, GT
<gina...@yahoo.com> a dit ...
DESMOND Writes -- Greetings, Geena, and welcome to the group.
Contrary to what some of the more ... erm ... intellectually challenged
members of this newsgroup have said, you can expect your stay here
to be fulfilling.
PV Writes -- I have clipped much of Desmond's ravings here, because
they are simply ravings. But certain points he mentions demand a
response. One general truism you should realize is that Desmond
Coughlan is a consummate and pathological liar. To even begin to
understand Desmond, two self-evident facts must be recognized --
1) He claims he is a Jew -- No one believes him. Because he USES that
to provide all forms of comments derogatory toward the Jews, and presumes
calling himself a Jew... provides justification for his remarks. He has gone
so far as to claim he speaks 'fluent Hebrew,' and that his 'family' were
victims of the holocaust. Yet his name is Coughlan, and he comes from
Ireland.
2) He claims his father was a law-enforcement officer. Once again, that
is all part of the persona he wishes to present here. Since no one believes
that he came from anything but an abusive childhood, which provided the
improper nurturing we see in 'present-day' Desmond. Otherwise, God has
played a ghastly trick on our species when He constructed the genes of
Desmond.
Every comment Desmond provides can be placed into one of ten
GIMMICKS that he uses... none of which are actually relevant to the DP, but
are more directed toward his racism, his anti-Semitism, his lies, his
Anti-Americanism, his pathetic need to provide insult, his sexual aberrations,
his 'edge of insanity egocentricity,' and his diseased and morbid obsession
with 'dominating' this newsgroup.
His above comment is his GIMMICK # 2 -- These 10 GIMMICKS, for
reference, are --
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GIMMICK # 1 -- He searches feverishly for some pedantic point, as a
chimp searches for fleas on his body. Where, finding them, even
if they are imaginary, he will thereby claims 'grammar victory.' He 'lives'
for the 'missing comma,' the 'misspelled word,' or the 'imaginary
morpheme.' One can easily recognize when he uses this GIMMICK.
In every instance of him providing a '(sic),' to a word another has used,
it is as if God has rubber-stamped his forehead with the word 'LOSER.'
GIMMICK # 2 -- He claims 'vast educational and intellectual capacity.'
Accompanied by a comment which disparages that same capacity in
the one he is responding to. Most frequently used to imply that all
Americans are 'uneducated,' while he has received a 'classical education.'
One should note that when his 'classical education' is threatened with
exposure, he will respond by claiming the other is a 'pseudo-intellectual.'
Whenever he encounters a term used by another that he is unfamiliar
with... the old 'pseudo-intellectual' GIMMICK # 2 comes out of his
repertoire of GIMMICKS.
GIMMICK # 3 -- Presentation of a bold-faced lie. Denying what he has
written, which is his obvious intent in hiding his posting history. He has
done this in 'claiming' his flat was firebombed by another poster, that
this other poster was sent to prison because of his efforts, and on
dozens of other occasions, in respect to dozens of other lies he has
presented. Saying one thing, and later saying quite the opposite, and
denying his first comment. Claiming he 'fears' death so much that the
excreta would be running down his leg if faced with death... see
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn8sia9a.hjj.desmond%40lievre.voute.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
and then claiming that 'I do not fear death' in the following post, plus
many others. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=D40o8.293959%24TV4.42072274%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com
Desmond has no shame... no embarrassment... no integrity... no principles...
no ethics... no honesty... no decency...no honor... no sense of moral
values. He is bereft of any concept of truthfulness. And when one
recognizes that, it becomes much easier to laugh at his lies.
GIMMICK # 4 - A claim that anyone who posts anonymously must be
'untruthful,' BY DEFINITION. While he hides his own posting history,
and does not know the meaning of 'truth.' This GIMMICK is easily
identified, since one can hear in the background, the sound of Colonel
Bogey's March, whistling through the emptiness between his two ears.
GIMMICK # 5 -- He provides a bigoted insult to certain segments of our
species. Either racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American, or against ALL
retentionists. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212911.18726.00000057%40mb-fe.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
and
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212910.18726.00000056%40mb-fe.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
and
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212912.18726.00000058%40mb-fe.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
in addition to him providing these racist comments I noted in --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Lg2z9.248333%24S8.4997097%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
GIMMICK # 6 -- He provides an illogical argument under any conditions we
might examine of logic. He has claimed a number of his 'opinions' do not
require 'proof.' For example, in respect to the DP possibly having a
deterrent effect on murder, he has stated "It is not necessary for
abolitionists to 'prove' that it does not deter." See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020927212909.06896.00002310%40mb-mv.aol.com&output=gplain
But every logical principle holds to "He Who asserts must prove."
Referred to as 'semper praesumitur pro negante.' A principle which
demands that the person advancing the proposition must prove it,
since the presumption is ALWAYS IN THE NEGATIVE. Further,
although not relevant to the fact that Desmond is illogical in his
argument, there ARE studies that demonstrate a deterrent effect
of the DP, namely one conducted by Emory University... see
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~cozden/Dezhbakhsh_01_01_paper.pdf
Desmond's lack of any capacity to logically examine any
issue, leads to the logical conclusion that his comments are worthless.
GIMMICK # 7 -- A display of a perverted character. Another of his favorites.
Perverse in his presence here... He loves to post pictures of 'dead and
decayed' bodies. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=bVhu9.1987%24OM6.70304%40newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
and his URL -- http://www.zeouane.org/dp/blonde.html
Which he has offered over and over, accompanied by many of his
patented perverted *giggles.* For example, his comment in respect to the
attack on a Moscow McDonald's which cost lives -- and which
he provided a *giggle* comment of --
"M
At least we know that they like good food ...
M"
See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021020212952.10684.00003505%40mb-cu.aol.com&output=gplain
And then his crass, uncaring comment regarding the loss of life in
an aircraft crash off the California coast, proving another *giggle* See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021019213003.00278.00005374%40mb-md.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
And his obscene *giggle* at the huge loss of life in the Moscow theater
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212938.18726.00000086%40mb-fe.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
He is famous for posting irrelevant URLs and comments which offer
his *giggles* in respect to tragedies. It seems every tragedy in the
world is greeted by him with such *giggles.* Including the WTC attack,
which he refers to with a (sic) every time it he mentions it, and the
'prayer' (really... A PRAYER!!!), that he offered for the safe 'journey'
to Mexico of seven escaped murderers from a Texas prison. An
appeal to GOD -- to guide them to the Mexican border. See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn93slmo.63.desmond%40gateway.voute.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
There is also no doubt that he has a perverted sexual appetite, which
is frequently demonstrated in his lust for 14-year-old nymphets. He
once said to another poster "send that 16-year-old niece of yours
around to give me a blowjob whenever I want one." See
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl638869775d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=diablo-F5D718.22561113012002%40ne
wsroom.utas.edu.au
He once posted his impression of the last 43 seconds of a teenage
female murder victim, and related how "As she falls, her skirt rides up
over her hips. The man notes that she isn't wearing panties. 'I shoulda
raped her first, the whore ..." One can literally picture the drool forming
as desi thinks about what he describes... she falls... her splayed thighs...
her panty-less pubic area... and one could imagine the stain that was
forming on the front of desi's pants, as he visually imagined how he
wished he had raped her before murdering her. See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020817212931.10131.00000274%40mb-fo.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
In general, he totally avoids any issue relating to the DP, concentrating
more on his anti-American passion, and his hate for humanity in
general, while creating many issues which have nothing to do with the DP.
Those issues he creates almost always have some perversion involved in their
creation, or express some form of a *giggle* at tragedy.
GIMMICK # 8 -- Recently, as his mental decline progresses, this has become
his 'favorite.' Providing NOTHING except a meaningless kindergarten insult
which is what I've now referred to as 'mindless drivel.' In point of fact, I have
kept track of such 'mindless drivel,' and it has reached more than 200 since
only 25 October. You can find that in my 'daily summary' of his drivel in
the posts titled "desi 'mindless drivel'" And if today is any indication, his decline
is accelerating. You can instantly recognize much of his 'mindless drivel,' since
it usually includes the words
*snigger*
*snort*
*cackle*
*boo*
*bwahahhahaha*
*chortle*
*guffaw*
*wheeze*
*dribble*
*cough*
etc.
GIMMICK # 9 -- He uses what was once analyzed by St. George (a most
observant and prescient poster), who formerly contributed here, that which
has come to be known as St. George Seminal Axiom 6) -- 'When faced with
utter defeat... simply clip everything and claim victory.'
GIMMICK # 10. His general use of an insult, containing nothing else. For
example he once called the Mother who had just had her son murdered -
perverse. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn8o8gdj.iit.desmond%40lievre.voute.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
This woman, assuming the handle 'bobbyc,' had come here temporarily trying
to find some understanding in respect to the horrendous murder of her son.
Rather than attempt to understand her pain... desi quite literally *giggled* as
he punched her in her emotional gut. Stating to her "your rather perverse taste
for state-sponsored murder." There is, in fact, a clear indication that
he is an 'angry drunk' as well... since when he does post using this GIMMICK
it is obvious that he is most probably drunk at the time.. and like many drunks...
when he gets drunk he gets brutal. This relates to all his GIMMICKS,
since he has never held a dialog which has not ended up with him using
one of his GIMMICKS in raging fury... ending up slamming his forehead
against his desk. He was certainly drunk when he posted to bobbyc, and
most probably drunk during most of his tirades.
Desmond writes -- A few pointers ...
i) You get from news:alt.activism.death-penalty what you put in. The
simple fact that you are a retentionist will not automatically attract
any abuse or insults.
PV writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- Right off the bat -- another lie. Clearly when
you first present any argument in support of the DP, you will be confronted
with a barrage of insults of various form from Desmond. To demonstrate
this truism, allow me to present just three of his many various comments
directed at ALL retentionists, who he refers to as 'deathies.' --
----------------------------------------------------
1) "When we as abolitionists, gaze down into the pit, and see the teeming
mass of deathies. When we shield our noses from the fetid stench of
rotting corpses mixed with the fresh smell of semen. When we look upon
their squat, evil faces, and yellow hate-filled eyes ... we, as dwellers
of the Light, have a moral duty to lift them from their vile, repulsive,
bestial fantasies. We must show them that orgasming over death, is not
the way that they show their humanity.
We are their betters. Unquestionably better. They dwell in the darkness.
We must bring them to the Light."
2) "I engage in 'abuse' of deathies as a matter of course. That's what they're
there for. `echo $DEITY` gave them to us, much as She gave sparrows to
the domestic cat. They're our playthings. They have no relevance in the
real world, except to remind us of the dark side to human nature, that can
exist in all of us. They're like child rapists. Nazis. Torturers of
small animals.
All this pretence of 'let's be civil to one another' is nauseating. How can
you be 'civil' to garbage ?"
3) "The deathies will look upon his departure, wipe the saliva from their chins,
and go back to masturbating over images of the 'gurney' (sic), or the
electric chair. We, the moral masters, the abolitionists, must show them
the huge damage that they have done, by driving out the only reasonable
one in their filthy midst."
------------------------------------------------------------------
Expect much of the same to be directed toward you personally, once
you offer any argument in support of retention. Try to imagine which
'category' of 'deathie' you fit into... since ALL are insulted in Desmond's
comments above.
Desmond writes -- ii) It is axiomatic that support for the death penalty is
inversely proportional to IQ.
PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 2 from Desmond's arsenal of GIMMICKS. The
presumption of a 'superior' intellect, coming from someone who, when he
encounters a term that is unfamiliar to him, calls the poster 'pseudo-intellectual.'
And for someone who lacks the slightest understanding of 'logic,' it is
a wonder that the word 'axiomatic' does not cause his hand to freeze
to the keyboard.
Desmond writes -- iii) There are a few disruptive posters on this group. One
of them, you ca recognise by the e-mail address 'old...@comcast.net'. He
also posts under several aliases, including (but not restricted to)
billy...@aol.com and David_M...@subspacemail.com. Do not be
fooled by these e-mail addresses: it is the same person posting under
all three.
PV writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- An obvious lie. Everyone knows they are three
different posters. Desmond just cannot 'handle the truth.'
Desmond writes -- His posts always end with the word 'Rev.', but he is not a
minister. He obtained his 'ordination' from an online website :
http://www.ulc.org/ One of my cats also got 'ordained' from the same
website, and there are some other posters here who became 'ministers' on
the same website, to poke fun at this particular idiot. His real name
is Donald McDonald (no, really, I'm not joking !), and he is a child
abuser (his website used to boast about how he 'set' his Pit Bull
Terrier to savage his daughter's face) and convicted felon.
PV Writes - GIMMICK # 3 -- More obvious lies. In fact, Desmond has
accused MANY of being pedophiles here, as he now accuses 'Donald
McDonald.' Desmond presumes such insults provide an 'argument,' when
in fact they are part of the most obscene behavior demonstrated from any
poster here. He certainly does not have the slightest idea who I am,
yet he has called ME a pedophile on a number of occasions. Here
are six examples of his words directed to me on six separate occasions
in his posting history--
1) "It might have flown right over your pointy little
redneck head as said head was bobbing up and down over
Dwight-the-Altar-Boy-From-Tampa's crotch" See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=diablo-7F7BB2.00235902032002%40newsroom.utas.edu.au&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
2) "altar-boy shagging Bible-basher" See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=L7Po8.12823%24K52.2085263%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
3) "altar-boy shagging prick"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=DUTo8.16901%24K52.2590863%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
4) "a bigoted old altar-boy-shagger"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=0Dbg8.11590%24j93.3613806%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
5) "you altar-boy-molesting dipshit."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=FlVf8.13270%24TV4.1933557%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
6) "Dwight the altar-boy from Wisconsin (or was he from
Tampa ? Can't remember. So many young boys, so
little time, eh, Jed ?) "
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=5qzg8.20855%24j93.5666102%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
So you decide for yourself if Desmond is possessed of a mind that is
not perverted. Why would he call ME... a handle that is totally unknown
to him... a pedophile ... unless he is at a loss for a rational response,
and must rely on the most perverted insults imaginable?
Further, he has also called many others homosexuals, including me,
believing that constitutes an 'insult' in HIS homophobic rage. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=B78o9.56920%24g73.1940501%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
and his other favorite target, who he assume is 'everywhere -- 'billytwat,'
calling him a homosexual, as well. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=rC7o9.56679%24g73.1937553%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
The funny thing is, that no one thinks it's an insult but Desmond. Thus,
his raging homophobia is clearly evident.
Desmond writes -- Some of the
'tricks' that this person has got up to, were to have my flat firebombed
because I disagreed with his views on the death penalty.
PV Writes -- Actually, Desmond has made this claim before, and then denied it
in a subsequent post -- see
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020720212941.22384.00000259%40mb-fo.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Quoting him -- "Eh ? What are you talking about ? The firebombing ?
I did _not_ claim that Drewl was responsible for that." 'Drewl' is
Desmond's name for Don Kool, who is the subject he speaks of.
Further, it's just GIMMICK # 3... a total lie, meant to draw sympathy
for 'poor, abused Desmond.' Who is himself the most abusive poster here.
No one here gives a shit about Desmond's flat, or even Desmond, except
as an object of ridicule. That's certainly all I see him as... ridicule and
pity. Of course, the ridicule has a PURPOSE, since there is no
doubt in my mind, that his presence here is 'evil.'
Desmond writes -- He also posted
my late mother's address to this newsgroup, asking others to 'go pay her
a visit'. If you run a quick search on google, you'll also find
references to where he advised the mother of a handicapped child to
'just smother the little cunt', and where he advocated raping female
abolitionists, so that 'the bitches know what it's like to be a victim'.
PV Writes -- GIMMICKS # 7 and # 10 -- GIMMICK # 7 demonstrates
that Desmond's own perverted character cannot be dismissed using
an 'example' of others. Looking at GIMMICK # 10, we find that
Desmond has demonstrated much perversion of his own. See his
GIMMICKS for specific examples of what I speak of. If you find any
of them 'unbelievable,' it is because they are too grotesque to be
'believable.' But just ask me to provide the reference in google to any
that you would question. He HAS admitted that he would GAMBLE
on a murderer committing a new murder, rather than execute
that murderer. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=KfRi9.6191%24yB5.253233%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
And this was in reference to his 'decision' that he would FREE
(release FREELY again to the public), Theodore Frank before he would
execute him. Don't know who Theodore Frank was? Well, he murdered
little 2-year-old Amy Sue Seitz. Want to see the history of that murderer?
See --
http://www.wtv-zone.com/LadyMaggie/php/AmySueStory.html
This was the man that Desmond would FREE rather than execute,
in his 'gamble' with the lives of innocent victims. Further, he described
in sexually graphic detail the last 43 seconds in the life of a murder victim
(ask yourself WHY he selected a teenage girl for his descriptive narrative --
it is because he has some form of a sexual perversion.. the younger
the better).
Desmond writes -- He has recently 'branched out' into posting a rote
response to my
articles, in the hope that I will be 'archived' in google, as I exercise
my right under the French Constitution, to freedom of expression, and
freedom to decide on the distribution of those words. A quick glance at
these 'archives', will show that as many of them have been altered
before being 'archived', they serve as much use as a safety match in the
Antarctic.
PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- None of the words of Desmond have been altered.
It is quite easy for him to again lie in that respect, since we have no
benchmark to his words, since he does not archive them. There are
many instances that he has DENIED saying those words, when it
is clear he had said them, since they were REMEMBERED by posters.
One of his most recent 'denials' was to deny that he had said "I personally
shrink from the entire doctrine of 'punishment' as a tool of crime prevention."
But his words are REMEMBERED.. and are in google... see
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021013212908.02941.00002718%40mb-dh.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
And in addition to dolly 'archiving' his words -- I also responded to those
exact words -- see
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=W0uq9.124670%24O8.2934232%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Further, Richard recognized the words... see
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DC7A752.EC46A08B%40hotmail.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
But you will find Desmond's DENIAL of having written those words in
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=triz9.161160%24r7.2920329%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Desmond writes -- iv) The most disruptive poster that this newsgroup
has _ever_ seen, however, posts mainly under the name 'A Planet Visitor'.
PV Writes -- GIMMICKS # 8 and 10 -- 'mindless drivel' accompanied by
an insult. He means because I have simply reported his comments
verbatim.
Desmond writes -- He is more disruptive
than the above, mainly because his lies and abuse are much more insiduous.
PV writes -- GIMMICK # 10. You will notice that Desmond makes a
expansive insult, as usual, without attaching the slightest bit of evidence
in my words that you might examine to determine how truthful he is -- It's
also part of his GIMMICK # 3 -- the big lie. You will note that throughout his
entire post, he provides not one quote, but relies on those expansive insults,
he provides without foundation.
Desmond writes -- He is a Catholic, and frequently peppers his posts
with priest-like incantations, and imprecations to 'strike down' his 'evil' and 'onery'
opponents.
PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 10 again. Actually, the posts of Desmond
stink of an 'Evangelist Tent Revival' meeting. Desmond has often
presumed that 'God is on his side.' Nor do I need 'God' to demonstrate
the evil of Desmond. I use Desmond's own words and quotes, and he does
quite well all on his own. Nor am I a 'devote' Catholic by any stretch
of the imagination, except that I was raised as such, and use the
church to focus my fundamental belief in a Creator, and
nothing more. Leaving a church that I was raised in, would be like
abandoning a Creator I believe in. I use the Catholic faith for no
other reason, simply because I cannot bring myself to claim 'no
faith.' In fact, I disavow any idea that 'religion' forms ANY part of the
DP. It is a totally secular penalty for a totally secular crime. Whatever
one believes in respect to religion has NOTHING to do with the secular
DP. You will find a more lengthy dialog on my 'core belief' in
another post of mine. See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=ayk_8.74102%24DS.2002568%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
But if anyone presumes to use their 'religious' background
as a support for their 'gospel,' it is Desmond, who professes to be
a Jew, so he can provide anti-Jewish sayings and feel secure in his
claim. If you wish to see a 'religious' hypocrite in the form of
Desmond, then see
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=%25NOr9.113018%24S8.2039342%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
A post which can only be seen as him presuming to speak from a pulpit
erected by God, as one of His chosen apostles. Preaching with a
religious fervor resembling Elmer Gantry, where he claims a 'Universal
right-to-life,' which presumes to ignore the starving child in Africa.
Desmond writes -- He seeks to impose his moral 'code' on others, either by
emotional blackmail where it will work, or by threats, where it won't.
GIMMICK # 6 -- An illogical argument, given that one only needs to look
at Desmond's posts and mine to recognize that HE would impose HIS
moral code on others, while I have continually expressed a belief that
it is wrong to think one can. Even in my post to you, I expressly stated
that I do not wish to impose 'MY' moral code on anyone. There is clear
evidence (see above, 1), 2) and 3), for his comments in respect to ALL
retentionists) that he intends to impose HIS 'moral code' (which I find far
from 'moral') on others. You will find no comment from me implying that
MY 'moral code' is THE 'moral code.' While he ALWAYS makes such a
claim. The 'moral code' I hold is my subjective view, and cannot
presume to provide an 'objective' moral code for the rest of humanity.
While Desmond presumes HIS can.
Desmond writes -- His most recent (and famous) outburst, was to wish
'out loud' for a contract killing to be carried out on another poster here.
GIMMICK # 3 -- Another lie. My comment was, in respect to
cross-posting to a motorcycle gang newsgroup -- My EXACT words
were "they might even put out a contract on desi." See --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=crnu9.158601%24S8.3152368%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Now Desmond would try to change the word 'might' to 'wish.' And that
is as silly as stating that if I had said "The U.S. might invade Iraq,"
it means that I 'wish' the U.S. invades Iraq. And clearly I do not. Or
"Escaped murderers might murder new innocents," means I
'wish' escaped murderers murder new innocents (we know that
only Desmond 'wishes' to 'gamble' on that). Further, my comment
did not contain the word 'killing' which Desmond, again in his devious
manner, tried to incorporate.
Desmond writes -- He maintains
a 'list' of things that I said, or am supposed to have said, and will
often burn bandwidth by posting and reposting that 'list', in the (vain)
hope that he will turn others against me.
PV writes -- He means I report his words... which frightens him terribly.
Just as I am doing here. His EXACT words. Why would that
concern him, if he was not in fear of his own words? Why would
he try to hide his own words from archive?
Desmond writes - His _modus operandi_ when a
new poster appears, is to play the role of the jovial 'grandpappy',
who'll ask you on a Monday morning if you went to Mass, and who will
only give you a Werthers Original if you can recite the Catechism
backwards. As soon as you disagree with his views on the death penalty,
however, he will call you 'mental', 'a moron', 'deranged', etc. He
is on record as saying that he will never trust an Arab,
PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- A lie. In fact THESE are Desmond's EXACT
words, not mine --
Calling Arabs "ragheads" in many posts
"the 'onery ragheads' * that are Arabs"
"not that Iraq has anything to do with al'Queda either, other than
that it's ruled by 'filthy ragheads'"
"Hey, why bother, right ? They're only ragheads ... 'Arab cunts'"
"'What the fuck, it's only ragheads ?"
"Iraq is ruled by 'filthy ragheads.'"
"Palestinians are 'dishonest'"
"The maniacal laughter as yet more 'ragheads' (sic) were killed in Palestine."
Desmond writes -- and has called
all Germans 'stupid' (although he will deny it ... just watch him !).
PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- Why would I NOT deny a lie from Desmond?
Am I supposed to permit him to lie? In fact, I have called one particular
German poster here 'stupid.' NEVER all Germans. Quite the opposite, I
have recognized that Germans are far from 'stupid.' And have been
a significant contributor to the advance of our species. But there IS
one particular German poster here, who has certainly demonstrated
an inability to grasp some rather fundamental principles and continues
to rely on 'emotion' as the focus of his opposition to the DP. And in
my opinion, my comment was well justified, since he also demonstrated
some latent anti-Semitic postings... claiming that the U.S. should add
a 'star' (think of the MEANING of such a word to a German and a Jew), to
the U.S. 'Banner,' calling ISRAEL the 53rd U.S. State. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=aljs8t%24vom%2405%241%40news.t-online.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Desmond is, of course, an equal opportunity bigot. He is a racist, a
bigot, an anti-Jewish, and an anti-Arab poster. Some of his racist words..
his EXACT words were -
1) In describing his idea of a 'typical' robber, somehow it always
ends up to be a Black. His words in describing the words of someone
intent on robbery -- "Gimmie da money, honkey mothafucka, oh ah toast
yo ass !!"
2) And in another post, almost the same -- "'Gimme da dough,
mothafucka o ah toast yo ass !!'"
3) Calling others -- "smelly 'Jigaboo' Ausländer."
4) Posting to me -- "I even 'tweaked' your nose a few days back, by using the
word 'jigaboo'" Presuming he insults ME, rather than an entire race.
5) And again to me "same bestial beating administered to LDB's [That
refers to me] now almost 'jigaboo' buttocks"
6) And again -- "Paris is an oasis of safety, be you jigaboo (ho, ho, ho ...) or not."
7)And again to me -- ":Say, LDB [that refers to me] ... how come your "ass" [sic] is so
jigaboo these days ?' ... "
8) And again "France (the Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth, BTW) did
not 'lose' the match against those jigaboo (*snigger*) upstarts, QZD."
9) And most recently --- "I cream in my pants when they execute a dumbfuck
nigga fry black fucker,"
And less you believe he is not bigoted against others Europeans as
well --
10) "it was German beer ... now, if only I could get the smell of sausage
out of the bloody bottles"
11) "Indeed, perhaps if the floods that are presently threatening Germany,
had been controlled before they swept across into Europe, from the Czech
Republic and Poland, then this fair continent would have been saved the
same fate as the smelly 'auslanders'."
Desmond writes - He used to be capable of making salient points, but
recently, has allowed his obsession with me to push him into making
terabtye-length posts, without a single point, other than, 'desi [that's me]
is bad to me !'
PV Writes -- Actually... Desmond would deny it... but 'desi' (that's him)
thinking is bad for our species! It is a destructive, rather than a
constructive view. You will find nothing positive ever comes from him,
unless it relates to his 'love for murderers.'
Desmond writes -- He claims not to care about the opinions of others
on the newsgroup, but
will frequently launch into an incandescent rage when others here refuse
to condemn 'evil desi' (if you want to see an example of this, look at
the headers of this article, and click on the 'Obsessive Litany' link).
He sees me everywhere, and indeed if you cross him, he will claim that I
am you, posting under an alias. No doubt I'm 'Arnold' from Marseille,
too. I'm in fact dirt, John Rennie, Richard Jackson, and Jigsaw rolled
into one. Christ, I'm the whole fucking newsgroup.
PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 8 -- 'mindless drivel.' I've claimed none of those
things. In fact, I have many times stated that I have no 'friends' here.
Neither abolitionist nor retentionist. I am here only to express an opinion.
My opinion. One can look at the many posts I have provided in that
regard. Simply by doing a search on my handle and 'opinion.' I eschew
all forms of e-mail with ANY other members here. Desmond literally
LIVES for 'backchannel' friendships, which naturally involve finding ways
to 'collectively backstab' others. But they holds no interest for me, as
this is not my 'real' life, but simply a medium I use to express my opinion.
Not caring whether others accept it or not... simply as an exercise of
such an expression. I am retired, and find it often fills my day. One
will always find my purpose here has been stated as to only express
MY opinion, and not expect to change the opinion of anyone else.
But isn't it strange that HE has complained in this very post, in his iii)
above, about OTHERS providing alias posts. In fact, our boy Desmond, has
demonstrated some rather bizarre behavior in the past, regarding my
presence here. Having created web images dedicated to me in his pitiful
'server.' See
url:http://mapage.noos.fr/desmond/dp/PV.gif
and
url:http://mapage.noos.fr/desmond/dp/jed.html
There is no telling how much more disgusting trash exists on
his pitiful 'zeouane.org' server, since I no longer look there,
after him posting disgusting pictures of 'dead and decayed'
bodies.
In point of fact, I have never tried to disguise my 'distaste' for
the evil he represents to our species. He would hope to translate
that into what he represents. I do not find 'evil' in the concept of
abolition. Quite the opposite... much of it is based on some rather
sound principles. I simply find the principles I see in retention
are stronger than those forces exhibited in abolition. My view
is always subject to modification. His God-Given Evangelist
'gospel' is quite different. Even a fool can see that... simply by
looking at his three comments at the beginning of this post. His
'gospel' is that ALL retentionists are evil. While I only find HIM
'evil.' That difference, between his 'gospel,' and my current viewpoint
demonstrates his PERSONAL descent into obscenity. I hold
nothing against any reasonable abolitionist. Desmond, however,
is far from 'reasonable,' or 'rational.'
Desmond writes - To guage the
'mettle' of this poster, consider that until I came back (more on that
below) to the newsgroup, he was the self-appointed 'spelling flamer'.
Once it was pointed out to him (by me, no really, no applause necessary)
that his spelling and grammar were nothing to write home about, he
decided that spelling and grammar flames were 'mindless drivel' ...
forgetting that he had been doing it before anyone !
PV writes -- Desmond's famous GIMMICK #1. He is clearly recognized
as the most anal, the most obsessive, and the most pedantic poster this
group has ever seen. Desmond is "The classic pedantic" -- Faster than a
run-on sentence, more powerful than an allomorph, able to detect a
missing comma at a single bound. It's a noun... it's a gerund... no... it's
the arch-enemy of the split-infinitive -- Desmond!!! <applause...applause...
applause>. Seriously, read GIMMICK # 1.. it is his MOST FAMOUS
and MOST OVERUSED GIMMICK. And God stamps his head with
'LOSER' every time he 'corrects' the words of another with a (sic).
Desmond writes -- LOL ! Still, lest
you come into the group without being aware of some of his more famous
'clangers', know that he believes that 'Newfound' is a country. He also
thinks that New South Wales is a province in the UK. He believes that
the death penalty is 'pro-black' because it results in blacks being
executed eleven times more frequently than whites, for the same crime.
PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 3. Another lie from Desmond, since no such
statistic exists. Blacks commit 51.5% of all homicides. See
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
While from the moment the DP was reinstated following Gregg,
there have ALWAYS been more Whites on DR than Blacks. In
2000, about 2,000 Whites and 1,500 Blacks on DR. See
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/drrace.htm
And in point of fact, many studies that examined 'comparable
crimes' have determined that none of the rubbish Desmond speaks of
exists. The Black higher level of violence is a FACT. But does
not speak to RACE. Blacks are not 'by nature' more violent,
but rather the racism of our nation, is what causes the Black to
see himself as of LESS value than the White, and who therefore
holds his life and the life of other Blacks in less regard. That
is why 94% of all Black victims are murdered BY Blacks. See again --
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
This particular 'human atrocity' -- the racism existing, both covertly
and often even overtly -- is part and parcel of the behavior that
Desmond himself demonstrates. Clearly, thinking such
as his ENGENDERS racism... and I have found him to be a
racist of the most hideous kind. In the U.S., I have no doubt he
would be active in the 'white power,' movement.
But all that HAS NOTHING to do with the DP. Since MURDERERS
MURDER. MURDER cannot be EXCUSED, if one has the capacity
to know right from wrong. And claiming that 'racism made me do
it,' is the lamest excuse in the world. Further, Desmond implies
that there is racism in the DP, and there is no recognized study
which has ever shown that. Quite the opposite... the DOJ conducted
a study of 950 capital cases, and concluded that there was no
evidence of racial bias. See
http://www.ins.usdoj.gov/graphics/aboutins/congress/testimonies/2001/6_06_01.pdf
and
http://www.ncpa.org/pi/crime/pd111998d.html
and
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/racism.htm
In any examination of those sentenced to the DP, the ACTUAL
crime must be examined, and the ACTUAL past behavior of the
murderer examined as well.. in EVERY case.
Desmond writes -- He 'invents' cutesy little grammatical rules, which he
then bends to fit
in with his posting. He believes that Geneva is a French city, and so
on. His tactic is to post reams and reams of URLs that he has never
opened, in 'support' of his arguments.
PV writes -- While Desmond NEVER bothers to research anything.
But simply makes it up as he goes along.
Desmond writes -- This resulted in one famous
example a few months back, in a debate on the Louise Woodward case,
where he posted a URL which was _full_ of mentions of a certain Rule
25[b][2], governing a judge's power in a criminal trial. He _swore_
that he had read the URL that he posted, but barely a fortnight later,
when Rule 25[b][2] was mentioned again, he asked, 'What's this Rule
25[b][2] ?'
PV writes -- GIMMICK # 8. Mindless drivel. In fact, Desmond provided
insult after insult to me in presuming that Judge Zobel could not have
overturned the sentence of Woodward, while I had continually argued
that he could. And then Desmond had to meekly admit he was wrong.
And after providing insult after insult, he did not even have the 'dignity' to
apologize. Presuming that it is okay to insult, as long as he claims it
was in 'good faith.' Here you go with some of his comments --
Desmond wrote --
"Psst, LDB [that's me] ? Tell us again about how O.J. Simpson was
'convicted of murder in a civil court' ... or even better, how Judge Zobel
'could have simply overturned' Louise Woodward's Second-Degree Murder
conviction, if he had wanted to ..."
Desmond wrote --
"The Judge was _not_ empowered to 'overturn' the verdict. All he
could do was to reduce it to manslaughter. Which is what he did."
Desmond wrote --
"This is plainly not the case. Rule 25(b)(2) allows a trial judge, to
_reduce_ the verdict, but not to overturn it."
Desmond wrote --
"If the defence had asked Zobel to deliver his ruling wearing eyeshadow
and pink polka dot pyjamas, suspended upside down from Air Force
One at 100 ft ASL, would LDB think that Rule 25[b][2] 'empowered'
him to comply ?"
Desmond wrote --
"ROTFLMAO !!!! Did you get that in your copy of _Law for Dummies_ ?
Because a judge denies a motion, it means that he was 'empowered'
to grant it ?
Oh Lord, this is _delicious_ !!! This is _wonderful_ !!!
You idiot ... you crass, classless, profoundly dense man. Oh, I
can't stop laughing ..."
Desmond wrote --
"Before you start making a fool of yourself ... oops, too late ... you
might like to consider what everyone has been trying to tell you for
nigh on 48 hours now, i.e. that the ruling shows no such thing. All
it shows is that the defence _asked_ Judge 'Sobel' (sic) to do that.
Rule 25[b][2] doesn't allow this, and so he had to deny the ruling."
Desmond wrote --
"his 'come-and-spank-me' inability to digest and analyse legal
texts and decisions ... his belief that Rule 25[b][2] (which he hadn't
even _heard of_, until JPB and I gave him a 'heads-up') gave Judge Zobel
the power to overturn the second degree murder conviction, handed down in
the Commonwealth v. Woodward case."
Desmond wrote --
"In, fact, the beautiful 'double-whammy' that I dealt you last night, was
that I pre-empted you with Judge Zobel's ruling, and that said ruling
shows that Rule 25[b][2] only allows a judge to reduce a murder conviction
to a lesser offence."
AND OOOPSSSS... here comes the 'embarrassed admission of his
error' --
"Based on my original reading of Rule 25[b][2], I stated that Judge Zobel
could not have overturned the guilty verdict, and that the only option
open to him, was to reduce the verdict of second degree murder, to a
lesser charge, namely that of manslaughter.
Upon further investigation, however, it would appear that he was, in
fact, authorised to both reduce the verdict, and (if necessary) quash
it completely. An e-mail that I received last night, from the Massachusetts
Bar Association, would appear to confirm this view.
Unless new information comes to light, I thus confirm that, _as far as
I am able to ascertain_, PV is right." See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=hIOb9.2423%24nL2.94455%40newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net&output=gplain
Now, take a look at his words -- the insults Desmond heaped on me, when
he was WRONG. And he expects to come away with NO APOLOGY?
He 'justifies' not needing to apologize because his insults were offered
in 'good faith.' See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020902212912.27149.00001383%40mb-cg.aol.com&output=gplain
Desmond writes - He is famous for posting weblinks that he hasn't even read,
and he got burned in another famous case, involving 'dirtdog', who is an
English lawyer posting here. The debate was about 'mitigating
circumstances', and Planet Visitor posted a URL which in fact disproved
his own argument !
PV writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- Desmond lies. Actually I totally destroyed
the 'English Lawyer,' providing 16 PROVEN correct LEGAL resources
to Criminal Statutes, Court citations, and Legal definitions that confirm
that 'mitigating circumstances' can reduce the degree of the offense,
which that simpleton backwater Lawyer dirtdog claimed could not be
done. He has never addressed even ONE of those sources I provided.
I will not list them here. But they can be found in my post -- See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=orF99.276607%24s8.5080238%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&output=gplain
<clip some 'mindless drivel' which has been rehashed and rehashed
and only makes Desmond look more stupid each time it is rehashed.
Plus some other stuff that would embarrass a hyena who is not
embarrassed when hunching over a zebra carcass, but which leaves
Desmond unfazed in respect to embarrassment, since that particular
emotion is not in his genes.>
One must only feel a great well of pity for someone like Desmond,
who lacks the capacity to see himself 'in the mirror of his life.' In
fact, when I pointed out his malady, which has the medical name
eisoptrophobia - a fear of mirrors -- he reacted unknowingly to the
term, by calling me 'pseudo-intellectual' yet again.
Desmond writes --- Enjoy your stay.
PV writes -- If you are a retentionist... beware of the jackal that is Desmond.
PV
BTW -- A few more choice selections from Desmond's past -- His words
EXACTLY (ask for the reference if you wish):
1) "Indeed, the dead are dead, and cannot be honoured, harmed, spat upon.."
That was one of his greater ones. And then saying in 'clarification' --
"We can certainly honour the memory of the dead." Presuming that the
dead do not exist, but 'the memory' does. While someone as dense as
Abraham Lincoln did not understand Desmond, and would certainly
have changed his words when he spoke at Gettysburg, and said "That
from these honored dead..."
2) "Of course, there's also the fact that the Lockerbie disaster
wasn't caused by a bomb at all, but by Pan-Am's use of an
unairworthy 747, which split in mid-air due to a phenomenon
called Clear Air Turbulence (or CAT for short)." Is there
ANYONE in the world (not even Khadaffi any longer) who
believes that crap? See
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/formal/n739pa/n739pa.htm
for the TRUE findings.
3) "The Balkans are not in Europe, Shona." and "neither Latvia
nor Estonia forms part of Europe."
4) And when asked -- Hmmm, isn't Bosnia in Europe? What
about Russia? Desmond replied -- "---Regrettably, no."
5) "But Europe has not had a war now since 1945, and
in matters of morals, has led the world for over two thousand
years." Gee... there seems to be a 'gap in morals' in that
two thousand years.
6) "'America' and 'The United States' are not synonyms" Funny,
everyone except Desmond seems to think they are.
7) "the truth is that Osamo bin-Laden had absolutely nothing to
do with the events of 11 September" That's a roll on the floor
comment, if ever there was one.
8) "I'm still wondering why, in the video released by the
United States government, Mr bin Laden is apparently seen
confirming that none of the terrorists knew what was about
to happen until they got onto the aircraft..." Gee... first bin
Laden had nothing to do with it... and now 'none' of the
terrorists knew they were on a suicide mission. I wonder
how they 'found out,' since NONE of them knew. This is
typical of Desmond's 'logic' (sic).
9) When someone raised the subject of Rita Van Huss, who
was a victim strangled by Richard Kutzner... Desmond made
light of it, by remarking "What do Dutch pormo stars have to do
with this ..?"
10) He said "Why not just shut down all of the nation's death rows,
and commute all of the sentences to life ?" And hardly hours
later said "I have stated that I am not in favour of life imprisonment
without parole." Apparently what Desmond supports is somewhat
confused as to what he does support.
Oh, Desmond is confused, alright (jump on it Desmond).
PV
--
Ayatollah Desmond Coughlan |Superlunary and Most Exalted
|Spiritual Leader of the Universal
|Right to Life Church. (umm... get
|away from me -- you filthy black
|starving child in Africa) 'My church'
|isn't for you.
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht ...
>Note --- this is a long post... but necessary. Since Desmond
>has attempted to 'justify' his behavior here.
>
Ticken Sie noch richtig, Sir? 49 kB von diesem GEWAFFEL????
Jürgen
Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DCEE36D...@hotmail.com>...
<snip>
>> Where and when I should have stated that *any* criminal can be
resocialized?
>
>Just my generalization of you, Jürgen. My opinion.
It has become a rather bad habit of this ng to "legitimize" false statements
by simply adding 'IMHO'. I established by a couple of examples that for the
US-death penalty do not exist clear limits in respect to any term as
'deserves', 'continuing threat', etc, etc. There are people on death row who
show significantly reduced culpability, and no one of you guys care anyway.
I expressed my standpoint with abundant clarity, while you'd like to pin any
silly slogans at me.
>>
>> >
>> >> Had you paid attention to my posts then you'd know that I quite well
deem
>> a
>> >> small percentage of criminals too dangerous to make a reintegrative
>> attempt
>> >> in general society.
>> >>
>> >> His principle attacks against the death
>> >> >penalty are the one you see above and another. Next, he will hit you
>> >> >with argument that the average nine years wait on death row is a form
of
>> >> >torture and as such is cruel and unusual. This despite the fact that
>> >> >the reason some waits to execution are lengthy is caused by actions
of
>> >> >the defendant's lawyers in appeals.
>> >>
>> >> AFAIK alot of the innocents found on death row had been not exonerated
by
>> >> the first, i.e. the mandatory appeal, Mr Jackson.
>> >
>> >That's true Jürgen. That first appeal is primarily to determine the
>> >trial is properly carried out. Subsequent appeals and writs have other
>> >purposes, and are filed by the defendant or his attorneys.
>> >
>>
>> Well, to sit in a matchbox while having been stripped off of the right to
>> life from one's own society is psychological torture.
>
>AH! At last we have it. Now that didn't take long, did it Jürgen?
No, not long at all, Richard. The death penalty by imposing unavoidable and
aggravating instinctive fear upon any condemned does belong into the area of
torturous penalties.
>
>Then you counter: 'Oh,
>> but that's the fault of the defense lawyers.' I now want to hear what any
>> innocent on death row IYO should do to avoid this torturous state. Should
he
>> waiver his appeals or continue?
>
>I definitely think he should continue. The problem is that those who
>know they are guilty as Hell also continue.
No, the problem is that you yet do not understand that it is also any
GUILTY'S right to have his case properly evaluated.
>> >That is an incorrect statement if you are speaking of just money. A
>> >defendant themselves can file on their own behalf and often do. If you
>> >are speaking of ALL of a person's personal resources, including his own
>> >intelligence and steadfastness, then I agree. But then, that's true in
>> >any trial.
>>
>> Well, let us stay on a reasonable plane. A prisoner will neither prove
his
>> innocence nor get any appellate ruling on his behalf, for instant in due
to
>> formerly neglected mitigating circumstances.
>
>Provided I under stand what you are saying, you are saying a prisoner
>cannot use previously unmentioned mitigating circumstances to prove
>reasonable doubt in an appeal. In fact, that is only partly correct.
>If a defense lawyer is advised of mitigating circumstances or testimony
>in disclosure prior to or during the trial and does not use them, they
>are not admissible at a later date. If the prosecutor withholds
>mitigating circumstances from the defense, not only can the defense use
>them at a later date, but the entire trial can (and has been on
>occasion) invalidated in appeals court and a new trial ordered.
That addresses the theoretical, legal situation, Richard. You however
claimed above a practical chance of incarcerated prisoners to defend
themselves by their own capabilities without external legal or monetary
support. This is nonsense, with all due respect.
>
>The law is a matter of skilly (skilly? Try skillful)
>> experts, and to prove innocence requires investigation - not inside but
>> outside of prison.
>
>It happens sometimes.
What happens sometimes? That death row prisoners defend themselves, or that
they are successful in doing so?
Nope. The one case is not what is at stake here. It is the SCOTUS-justices'
opinion which equates a general admission to a defense-standard so low that
it is enough if the defense-lawyer did not sleep all over the trial.
There are also cases, many
>cases in fact, where public defenders skillfully defended their clients
>successfully, or helped them exonerate themselves in appeals. Let's
>see, you claim over a hundred wrongfully convicted men were released
>from death row, right? How many of those hundred were wealthy, and how
>many had help from public sources?
"Public sources", that includes support from private persons, right?
<...>
>> >> >Oh yes, a claim of most abolitionist here, Jürgen included, is that
>> >Executed innocents despite the fact that there has not been one case
>> >where e a wrongful execution has been conclusively proven in the US
>> >since the resumption of the death penalty.
>> >
>> >Not one. And do not start that crap about there being no way to prove
>> >innocence. You know as well as I that the real question is proof of
>> >wrongful execution through new and conclusive evidence or the
>> >irrefutable confession of a criminal to a murder. Where is it Jürgen?
>> >
>>
>> My thesis is clear. I did never claim to hold evidence for an innocently
>> executed - I concluded from (a) lots of death-sentenced proven innocent
>> while on death row and from (b) the switch of the burden of proof after
>> trial to the situation that any innocent on death row who were unable to
>> prove his innocence to a high standard will be executed. Pretty clear.
>>
>
>Prove it.
The thesis: "Since (a) and (b) are true the US have executed innocents p.F.
with high likelihood" requires no more proof than given by good observation.
What you demand for is certainty - which was not claimed by me.
J.
Richard J
>
> Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DCEE36D...@hotmail.com>...
>
> <snip>
>
> >> Where and when I should have stated that *any* criminal can be
> resocialized?
> >
> >Just my generalization of you, Jürgen. My opinion.
>
> It has become a rather bad habit of this ng to "legitimize" false statements
> by simply adding 'IMHO'.
False claims in your opinion, Jürgen, not in mine.
I established by a couple of examples that for the
> US-death penalty do not exist clear limits in respect to any term as
> 'deserves', 'continuing threat', etc, etc. There are people on death row who
> show significantly reduced culpability, and no one of you guys care anyway.
I care a great deal about them. I want to see those who facilitate
murder treated as murderers. Given that, they are where they need to be
IMO.
> I expressed my standpoint with abundant clarity, while you'd like to pin any
> silly slogans at me.
THAT is debatable. Your clarity is sometimes obtuse due to your
peculiar use of English at times. I wish I could speak German so we
communicated in your language without such problems, but then you would
probably find my German confusing just as I sometimes find your English.
I understand that. It does take a great deal of time sometimes to
arrive at the rightful punishment of capital murderers when petition and
appeals are filed without the least chance of the condemned being
innocent. I've seen too many lawyers who admitted their client's guilt
who yet continued to file appeal and writ after writ in delaying tactics
for twenty or more years. Those types of appeals and writs don't have a
damned thing to do with the fact that the murderer actually committed
the crime, but are filed to delay the inevitable in hopes that the
system will change somehow and the client will get LWOP instead of
juiced.
Now mind you, not all appeals are filed for this purpose, but a goodly
amount of them are.
>
> >> >That is an incorrect statement if you are speaking of just money. A
> >> >defendant themselves can file on their own behalf and often do. If you
> >> >are speaking of ALL of a person's personal resources, including his own
> >> >intelligence and steadfastness, then I agree. But then, that's true in
> >> >any trial.
> >>
> >> Well, let us stay on a reasonable plane. A prisoner will neither prove
> his
> >> innocence nor get any appellate ruling on his behalf, for instant in due
> to
> >> formerly neglected mitigating circumstances.
> >
> >Provided I under stand what you are saying, you are saying a prisoner
> >cannot use previously unmentioned mitigating circumstances to prove
> >reasonable doubt in an appeal. In fact, that is only partly correct.
> >If a defense lawyer is advised of mitigating circumstances or testimony
> >in disclosure prior to or during the trial and does not use them, they
> >are not admissible at a later date. If the prosecutor withholds
> >mitigating circumstances from the defense, not only can the defense use
> >them at a later date, but the entire trial can (and has been on
> >occasion) invalidated in appeals court and a new trial ordered.
>
> That addresses the theoretical, legal situation, Richard. You however
> claimed above a practical chance of incarcerated prisoners to defend
> themselves by their own capabilities without external legal or monetary
> support. This is nonsense, with all due respect.
Not at all, Jürgen. Prisoners often file writs of Habius Corpus on
their own behalf.
>
> >
> >The law is a matter of skilly (skilly? Try skillful)
> >> experts, and to prove innocence requires investigation - not inside but
> >> outside of prison.
> >
> >It happens sometimes.
>
> What happens sometimes? That death row prisoners defend themselves, or that
> they are successful in doing so?
Both.
Wrong. It is their decision in this one case. Another case might well
be filed under the EXACT circumstances, and be successful. What you
fail to recognize here, Jürgen, is that SCOTUS can, and does, make
rulings on individual cases some time which ONLY effect that case and no
others. In other instances, they make a ruling on a widespread action
which effects all similar cases, and they are very careful to make those
distinctions in their opinions.
>
> There are also cases, many
> >cases in fact, where public defenders skillfully defended their clients
> >successfully, or helped them exonerate themselves in appeals. Let's
> >see, you claim over a hundred wrongfully convicted men were released
> >from death row, right? How many of those hundred were wealthy, and how
> >many had help from public sources?
>
> "Public sources", that includes support from private persons, right?
Of course. Let's limit that a bit, then. How many had help from public
defenders who enlisted other public sources? Or don't the PD's count in
these, Jürgen?
>
> <...>
>
> >> >> >Oh yes, a claim of most abolitionist here, Jürgen included, is that
> >> >Executed innocents despite the fact that there has not been one case
> >> >where e a wrongful execution has been conclusively proven in the US
> >> >since the resumption of the death penalty.
> >> >
> >> >Not one. And do not start that crap about there being no way to prove
> >> >innocence. You know as well as I that the real question is proof of
> >> >wrongful execution through new and conclusive evidence or the
> >> >irrefutable confession of a criminal to a murder. Where is it Jürgen?
> >> >
> >>
> >> My thesis is clear. I did never claim to hold evidence for an innocently
> >> executed - I concluded from (a) lots of death-sentenced proven innocent
> >> while on death row and from (b) the switch of the burden of proof after
> >> trial to the situation that any innocent on death row who were unable to
> >> prove his innocence to a high standard will be executed. Pretty clear.
> >>
> >
> >Prove it.
>
> The thesis: "Since (a) and (b) are true the US have executed innocents p.F.
> with high likelihood" requires no more proof than given by good observation.
> What you demand for is certainty - which was not claimed by me.
>
> J.
That is only because it cannot be claimed any more than it can be
claimed we have wrongfully executed, or will never wrongfully execute,
someone. The question becomes one of reasonable doubt. IMO, there is
no reasonable doubt that the possibility exists just as you have no
reasonable doubt the reality does. Neither of us, though, have proof of
such an act.
You are accusing the state of committing a horrible wrong based upon at
best circumstantial evidence. IMO, you have not proven guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. I must find the state so far innocent of wrongdoing
until such a time as you have better and conclusive evidence. It isn't
enough in this instance to claim that where there is smoke there's
fire. You are going to have to actually prove the fire.
Teflon
Jürgen
Desmond Coughlan schrieb in Nachricht ...
le Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:08:42 +0100, dans l'article
<aqor36$tpc$02$1...@news.t-online.com>, "Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> a
dit ...
>>Note --- this is a long post... but necessary. Since Desmond
>>has attempted to 'justify' his behavior here.
> Ticken Sie noch richtig, Sir? 49 kB von diesem GEWAFFEL????
I didn't see this post by LDB ... where is it ???
It is actually a Masterpiece of 49 kB extent - shall I really repeat
this??????? I didn't bother reading, and I don't think anyone else will, but
if you really want to see it then I'll "answer" to it unsnipped asap.
Jürgen
Jürgen
Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DCFFD96...@hotmail.com>...
<snip>
>>
>> >> Where and when I should have stated that *any* criminal can be
>> resocialized?
>> >
>> >Just my generalization of you, Jürgen. My opinion.
>>
>> It has become a rather bad habit of this ng to "legitimize" false
statements
>> by simply adding 'IMHO'.
>
>False claims in your opinion, Jürgen, not in mine.
Nope. That I would have called *any* criminal reformable is bluntly false -
nothing about IMO or IYO, there is no passage in the archive to support this
your claim. There are however several passages where I stated that a few
offenders are too dangerous to allow any return into general society.
>
> I established by a couple of examples that for the
>> US-death penalty do not exist clear limits in respect to any term as
>> 'deserves', 'continuing threat', etc, etc. There are people on death row
who
>> show significantly reduced culpability, and no one of you guys care
anyway.
>
>I care a great deal about them. I want to see those who facilitate
>murder treated as murderers. Given that, they are where they need to be
>IMO.
>
>> I expressed my standpoint with abundant clarity, while you'd like to pin
any
>> silly slogans at me.
>
>THAT is debatable. Your clarity is sometimes obtuse due to your
>peculiar use of English at times. I wish I could speak German so we
>communicated in your language without such problems, but then you would
>probably find my German confusing just as I sometimes find your English.
>
My limited command of the English language made it often necessary to go a
somewhat lenghtier way in expressing my points. I did so, and you proved by
your replies to have EXACTLY understood my argumentation.
<snip>
>> >Then you counter: 'Oh,
>> >> but that's the fault of the defense lawyers.' I now want to hear what
any
>> >> innocent on death row IYO should do to avoid this torturous state.
Should
>> he
>> >> waiver his appeals or continue?
>> >
>> >I definitely think he should continue. The problem is that those who
>> >know they are guilty as Hell also continue.
>>
>> No, the problem is that you yet do not understand that it is also any
>> GUILTY'S right to have his case properly evaluated.
>
>I understand that. It does take a great deal of time sometimes to
>arrive at the rightful punishment of capital murderers when petition and
>appeals are filed without the least chance of the condemned being
>innocent.
No, you obviously yet do not understand.
Is there any appeal of a guilty which were justified IYO?
I've seen too many lawyers who admitted their client's guilt
>who yet continued to file appeal and writ after writ in delaying tactics
>for twenty or more years. Those types of appeals and writs don't have a
>damned thing to do with the fact that the murderer actually committed
>the crime, but are filed to delay the inevitable in hopes that the
>system will change somehow and the client will get LWOP instead of
>juiced.
And? The statement: 'I did the crime and am guilty, but I am no aggravated
and continuing threat' makes perfectly sense and is (a) legitime and well
may be (b) justified within your own law's framework. It is rather that you
are GENERALLY unable/unwilling to make distinctions between guilties.
<snip>
>> >> The standard is pretty clear in the face of SCOTUS-justices who
expressed
>> >> the opinion that a sleeping lawyer is no reason to declare the trial
>> >> invalid.
>> >
>> >That is one case and is not a standard.
>>
>> Nope. The one case is not what is at stake here. It is the
SCOTUS-justices'
>> opinion which equates a general admission to a defense-standard so low
that
>> it is enough if the defense-lawyer did not sleep all over the trial.
>
>Wrong. It is their decision in this one case. Another case might well
>be filed under the EXACT circumstances, and be successful. What you
>fail to recognize here, Jürgen, is that SCOTUS can, and does, make
>rulings on individual cases some time which ONLY effect that case and no
>others. In other instances, they make a ruling on a widespread action
>which effects all similar cases, and they are very careful to make those
>distinctions in their opinions.
Name me the phase of a trial when it is of no importance that the defense is
awake. (...The entire penalty phase, perhaps? Guilt has been established,
and the waffle about 'continuing threat' or 'mitigating circumstances' is
totally subordinated?)
I am of diametrically different opinion here, Richard. It is you and your
state who wants to execute humans, NOT ME. So it is YOUR VERY MINIMAL
obligation to create a procedure which leaves no reasonable doubts in its
accuracy, at the very, very least in view of the trivialest question at
trial whether the charged did the deed at all. I raised REASONED and GRAVE
doubts, and this is way sufficient to shake the capital punishment-system in
its fundaments.
Jürgen
Steve Towne
conspicuously silent. Especially after the lads, both pro
and con, went to such lengths to make her feel welcome.
Something seems a bit odd. What say you, Geena?
ST
GT
have to say, my jaw hit the floor on a couple of the warnings, but overall I
think I'll have fun here interacting with everyone.
As for the warnings of insults and verbal attacks.. well, I guess if anyone
feels the need, go right ahead. I like a good debate, have a sense of
humor, thick skin, and I'm not opposed to looking at others points of view.
Hopefully I'm not inadvertently publishing my personal details by posting
this.. and if anyone notices something I should shield that may be showing,
please feel free to contact me!
Kind Regards,
Geena
"GT" <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com...
: I just wanted to introduce myself to the group. Though, after reading
:
:
GT
Would you be pro-death penalty if you were satisfied that every capital
murder trial defendant was provided an adequate defense?
Geena
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:aql2kf$ohu$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
:
: GT schrieb in Nachricht ...
:
:
GT
Hi, and thank you for your welcome! It's great to hear from people on both
sides of this debate, and appreciate your words of warning. That having
been said, and since your post was the first to fire up my love of
debate....I just have one quick question and observation....
Do you really believe that those who are opposed to the death penalty are on
average more intelligent than those who are pro-death penalty?
And...if so, would this be an example of the superior intellect at work?
:)
Try saying 'I'm against the death penalty' in a bar full of Irish
> immigrants in 'Noo Joisey' (yes, I speak from experience), and you'll
> see what I mean.
>
Anti-death penalty death wish???
<grins>
Geena
GT
response strings... I may have had an incindiary grenade I wasn't aware of!
Thanks for the welcome, and offer of arms!
Geena
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
news:YHrz9.161$N%6.2...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
:
: "GT" <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
:
:
GT
lazily in bed.
The computer 4 rooms away. Give a girl a break!
Geena
" Steve Towne" <cmp...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:LgYz9.518$XF5.1...@news2.west.cox.net...
:
: "GT" <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
:
:
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 20:06:52 +0000
>
>le Mon, 11 Nov 2002 21:07:36 +0100, dans l'article <aqp225$65h$02$1@news.=
>t-online.com>, "J=FCrgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> a dit ...=20
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> I didn't see this post by LDB ... where is it ???
>
>> It is actually a Masterpiece of 49 kB extent - shall I really repeat
>> this??????? I didn't bother reading, and I don't think anyone else will=
>, but
>> if you really want to see it then I'll "answer" to it unsnipped asap.
>
>No thanks, my newsserver was configured to reject posts of >50 kB. I pic=
>ked
>it up from another server. :-)
>
>--=20
>Desmond Coughlan=20=20=20=20=20
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1.bredband.com!br
edband!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!fu-berlin.de!uni-berli
n.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 20:06:52 +0000
>Lines: 21
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <sk2pqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><aqor36$tpc$02$1...@news.t-online.com> <gfuoqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><aqp225$65h$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037045540 12859361 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-No-Archive: true
>Mail-Copies-To: never
>X-Obsessive-Litany: http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>X-Chats: http://www.zeouane.org/chats/
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3F1F C838 88D5 2659 B00A 6DF6 6883 FB9C E34A AC93
>User-Agent: tin/1.5.14-20020926 ("Soil") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.5-RELEASE (i386))
>
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:50:07 +0000
>
>le Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:55:44 +0000, dans l'article
><gfuoqa....@lievre.voute.net>, Desmond Coughlan
><pasdespa...@zeouane.org> a dit ...
>
>>>>Note --- this is a long post... but necessary. Since Desmond
>>>>has attempted to 'justify' his behavior here.
>
>>> Ticken Sie noch richtig, Sir? 49 kB von diesem GEWAFFEL????
>
>> I didn't see this post by LDB ... where is it ???
>
>Never mind, I caught it on another server. 919 lines !! Nine
>hundred and nineteen lines of obsessive spittle sprayed at the
>screen ... all to 'get a friend'. LOL ... if I were Geena, I'd
>be having a very hot shower right now ...
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator2-sterling!news-in-sterling.newsfeed.com!
news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de
!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.F
>R!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:50:07 +0000
>Lines: 19
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <fl1pqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><aqor36$tpc$02$1...@news.t-online.com> <gfuoqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037044644 12407401 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:55:44 +0000
>
>le Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:08:42 +0100, dans l'article <aqor36$tpc$02$1@news.=
>t-online.com>, "J=FCrgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> a dit ...=20
>
>>>Note --- this is a long post... but necessary. Since Desmond
>>>has attempted to 'justify' his behavior here.
>
>> Ticken Sie noch richtig, Sir? 49 kB von diesem GEWAFFEL????
>
>I didn't see this post by LDB ... where is it ???
>
>--=20
>Desmond Coughlan=20=20=20=20=20
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.icl.net!new
sfeed.fjserv.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!fu-berlin.de
!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212
>-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:55:44 +0000
>Lines: 15
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <gfuoqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><aqor36$tpc$02$1...@news.t-online.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037041118 11810302 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 08:51:19 +0000
>
>le Sun, 10 Nov 2002 20:15:34 +0000, dans l'article
><slrnastfj4.2aic...@lievre.voute.net>, dirtdog
><nospam_...@zeouane.org> a dit ...
>
>>> A classic example of this is when he
>>> claimed that dirtdog, the poster whom I mentioned above, is anti-
>>> Semitic. Now, dirtdog has made _one_ mention of Israel in the
>whole
>>> two or three years that he has been posting.
>
>> Let's be more specific here. PV has not just claimed that I am
>> anti-semitic, which I might possibly have indicated without
>> mentioning Israel. However, more precisely (and _child's play_ to
>> disprove), FW claimed that I have challenged Israel's legitimacy and right
>> to exist - which would be rather difficult for me to articulate without
>> mentioning the 'I' word.
>>
>> A simple search of Google displayed for all to see that FW was talking
>> absolute shite, and I still should be obliged to hear upon what ground he
>> bases this nonsensical claim.
>>
>> Of course, I feel that in the face of the clear fact that this was simply
>> a lie aimed to turn others against me (whose opinions he contends, as you
>> correctly point out, don't matter to him), and that he has clearly been
>> caught out, he wll simply claiming that he was 'just trolling'.
>
>As he does whenever he gets thrashed, i.e. every day. Indeed, Drewl's
>obsessive 'archiving' (sic) of my posts, works against him, as anyone
>could see and detect the satire in my 'ragheads' post. By claiming
>that I meant 'all Arabs are ragheads', he only discredited himself, and
>allowed his buttocks to take another tanning.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
feed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.arcor-onlin
e.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 08:51:19 +0000
>Lines: 34
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <72rnqa...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><slrnastfj4.2aic...@lievre.voute.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037005046 12042314 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
GT
I get the sense that your reply was less for me, than 'for the record'.
Regardless, thank you for your welcome. Luckily, I have been offered
weapons and kevlar by Steve Towne, and also have reasonable grasp of how
logical fallacy can be used in debate. Consider me warned!
Geena
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
: Note --- this is a long post... but necessary. Since Desmond
: and then claiming that 'I do not fear death' in the following post, plus
: many others. See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=D40o8.29395
9%24TV4.42072274%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com
: Desmond has no shame... no embarrassment... no integrity... no
principles...
: no ethics... no honesty... no decency...no honor... no sense of moral
: values. He is bereft of any concept of truthfulness. And when one
: recognizes that, it becomes much easier to laugh at his lies.
:
: GIMMICK # 4 - A claim that anyone who posts anonymously must be
: 'untruthful,' BY DEFINITION. While he hides his own posting history,
: and does not know the meaning of 'truth.' This GIMMICK is easily
: identified, since one can hear in the background, the sound of Colonel
: Bogey's March, whistling through the emptiness between his two ears.
:
: GIMMICK # 5 -- He provides a bigoted insult to certain segments of our
: species. Either racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American, or against ALL
: retentionists. See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212911.18726.00000057%40mb-fe.a
ol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: and
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212910.18726.00000056%40mb-fe.a
ol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: and
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212912.18726.00000058%40mb-fe.a
ol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: in addition to him providing these racist comments I noted in --
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Lg2z9.248333%24S8.4997097%40twister.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
:
: GIMMICK # 6 -- He provides an illogical argument under any conditions we
: might examine of logic. He has claimed a number of his 'opinions' do not
: require 'proof.' For example, in respect to the DP possibly having a
: deterrent effect on murder, he has stated "It is not necessary for
: abolitionists to 'prove' that it does not deter." See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020927212909.06896.00002310%40mb-mv.a
ol.com&output=gplain
: But every logical principle holds to "He Who asserts must prove."
: Referred to as 'semper praesumitur pro negante.' A principle which
: demands that the person advancing the proposition must prove it,
: since the presumption is ALWAYS IN THE NEGATIVE. Further,
: although not relevant to the fact that Desmond is illogical in his
: argument, there ARE studies that demonstrate a deterrent effect
: of the DP, namely one conducted by Emory University... see
: http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~cozden/Dezhbakhsh_01_01_paper.pdf
: Desmond's lack of any capacity to logically examine any
: issue, leads to the logical conclusion that his comments are worthless.
:
: GIMMICK # 7 -- A display of a perverted character. Another of his
favorites.
: Perverse in his presence here... He loves to post pictures of 'dead and
: decayed' bodies. See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=bVhu9.1987%24OM6.70304%40newsfep1-gui.s
erver.ntli.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: and his URL -- http://www.zeouane.org/dp/blonde.html
: Which he has offered over and over, accompanied by many of his
: patented perverted *giggles.* For example, his comment in respect to the
: attack on a Moscow McDonald's which cost lives -- and which
: he provided a *giggle* comment of --
: "M
: At least we know that they like good food ...
: M"
: See --
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021020212952.10684.00003505%40mb-cu.a
ol.com&output=gplain
: And then his crass, uncaring comment regarding the loss of life in
: an aircraft crash off the California coast, proving another *giggle* See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021019213003.00278.00005374%40mb-md.a
ol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: And his obscene *giggle* at the huge loss of life in the Moscow theater
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20021024212938.18726.00000086%40mb-fe.a
ol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: He is famous for posting irrelevant URLs and comments which offer
: his *giggles* in respect to tragedies. It seems every tragedy in the
: world is greeted by him with such *giggles.* Including the WTC attack,
: which he refers to with a (sic) every time it he mentions it, and the
: 'prayer' (really... A PRAYER!!!), that he offered for the safe 'journey'
: to Mexico of seven escaped murderers from a Texas prison. An
: appeal to GOD -- to guide them to the Mexican border. See --
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn93slmo.63.desmond%40gateway.voute.n
et&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
:
: There is also no doubt that he has a perverted sexual appetite, which
: is frequently demonstrated in his lust for 14-year-old nymphets. He
: once said to another poster "send that 16-year-old niece of yours
: around to give me a blowjob whenever I want one." See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl638869775d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=
UTF-8&selm=diablo-F5D718.22561113012002%40ne
:
: He once posted his impression of the last 43 seconds of a teenage
: female murder victim, and related how "As she falls, her skirt rides up
: over her hips. The man notes that she isn't wearing panties. 'I shoulda
: raped her first, the whore ..." One can literally picture the drool
forming
: as desi thinks about what he describes... she falls... her splayed
thighs...
: her panty-less pubic area... and one could imagine the stain that was
: forming on the front of desi's pants, as he visually imagined how he
: wished he had raped her before murdering her. See --
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020817212931.10131.00000274%40mb-fo.a
ol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
:
: In general, he totally avoids any issue relating to the DP, concentrating
: This woman, assuming the handle 'bobbyc,' had come here temporarily trying
:
: 2) "altar-boy shagging Bible-basher" See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=L7Po8.12823%24K52.2085263%40typhoon.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: 3) "altar-boy shagging prick"
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=DUTo8.16901%24K52.2590863%40typhoon.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: 4) "a bigoted old altar-boy-shagger"
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=0Dbg8.11590%24j93.3613806%40typhoon.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: 5) "you altar-boy-molesting dipshit."
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=FlVf8.13270%24TV4.1933557%40typhoon.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: 6) "Dwight the altar-boy from Wisconsin (or was he from
: Tampa ? Can't remember. So many young boys, so
: little time, eh, Jed ?) "
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=5qzg8.20855%24j93.5666102%40typhoon.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
:
: So you decide for yourself if Desmond is possessed of a mind that is
: not perverted. Why would he call ME... a handle that is totally unknown
: to him... a pedophile ... unless he is at a loss for a rational response,
: and must rely on the most perverted insults imaginable?
:
: Further, he has also called many others homosexuals, including me,
: believing that constitutes an 'insult' in HIS homophobic rage. See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=B78o9.56920%24g73.1940501%40twister.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: and his other favorite target, who he assume is 'everywhere --
'billytwat,'
: calling him a homosexual, as well. See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=rC7o9.56679%24g73.1937553%40twister.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
:
: The funny thing is, that no one thinks it's an insult but Desmond. Thus,
: his raging homophobia is clearly evident.
:
: Desmond writes -- Some of the
: 'tricks' that this person has got up to, were to have my flat
firebombed
: because I disagreed with his views on the death penalty.
:
: PV Writes -- Actually, Desmond has made this claim before, and then denied
it
: in a subsequent post -- see
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020720212941.22384.00000259%40mb-fo.a
ol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: Quoting him -- "Eh ? What are you talking about ? The firebombing ?
: And this was in reference to his 'decision' that he would FREE
: And in addition to dolly 'archiving' his words -- I also responded to
those
: exact words -- see
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=W0uq9.124670%24O8.2934232%40twister.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: Further, Richard recognized the words... see
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DC7A752.EC46A08B%40hotmail.com&oe=UTF-
8&output=gplain
: But you will find Desmond's DENIAL of having written those words in
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=triz9.161160%24r7.2920329%40twister.tam
pabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
:
: Desmond writes -- iv) The most disruptive poster that this newsgroup
: But if anyone presumes to use their 'religious' background
: as a support for their 'gospel,' it is Desmond, who professes to be
: a Jew, so he can provide anti-Jewish sayings and feel secure in his
: claim. If you wish to see a 'religious' hypocrite in the form of
: Desmond, then see
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=%25NOr9.113018%24S8.2039342%40twister.t
ampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
: A post which can only be seen as him presuming to speak from a pulpit
:
: Now Desmond would try to change the word 'might' to 'wish.' And that
: Desmond is, of course, an equal opportunity bigot. He is a racist, a
: and
:
: Now, take a look at his words -- the insults Desmond heaped on me, when
: he was WRONG. And he expects to come away with NO APOLOGY?
: He 'justifies' not needing to apologize because his insults were offered
: in 'good faith.' See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020902212912.27149.00001383%40mb-cg.a
ol.com&output=gplain
:
: Desmond writes - He is famous for posting weblinks that he hasn't even
read,
: and he got burned in another famous case, involving 'dirtdog', who is
an
: English lawyer posting here. The debate was about 'mitigating
: circumstances', and Planet Visitor posted a URL which in fact disproved
: his own argument !
:
: PV writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- Desmond lies. Actually I totally destroyed
: the 'English Lawyer,' providing 16 PROVEN correct LEGAL resources
: to Criminal Statutes, Court citations, and Legal definitions that confirm
: that 'mitigating circumstances' can reduce the degree of the offense,
: which that simpleton backwater Lawyer dirtdog claimed could not be
: done. He has never addressed even ONE of those sources I provided.
: I will not list them here. But they can be found in my post -- See
:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=orF99.276607%24s8.5080238%40twister.tam
pabay.rr.com&output=gplain
:
: <clip some 'mindless drivel' which has been rehashed and rehashed
:
:
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
<gina...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thank you to everyone who took the time to welcome me into this group. I
> have to say, my jaw hit the floor on a couple of the warnings, but
> overall I
> think I'll have fun here interacting with everyone.
>
> As for the warnings of insults and verbal attacks.. well, I guess if
> anyone
> feels the need, go right ahead. I like a good debate, have a sense of
> humor, thick skin, and I'm not opposed to looking at others points of
> view.
>
> Hopefully I'm not inadvertently publishing my personal details by posting
> this.. and if anyone notices something I should shield that may be
> showing,
> please feel free to contact me!
You should be welcome here given your assertions that you have a thick
skin. Do be aware that those who engage you won't be afraid to use
words like "bullshit", "bollocks", "idiot" and others even in the
context of reasonably "civilised" debate. If someone calls you an idiot
on a.a.d-p. they don't necessarily mean it (although they _might_) and,
if someone labels your argument a "crock" (as I am almost certain to do
in the future should you remain here for an appreciable length of time)
it doesn't necessarily mean that _you_ are a "crock" (although there are
exceptions).
By and large, your opponents aren't particularly interested in your
personal details but there are some "bad apples" on both sides of the
debate and, unfortunately, the rotten ones on the retentionist side tend
to take "advantage" of personal details even if they're the wrong ones.
Be aware, though, that this is a playground for those who are prepared
to cop an arseload of abuse and still get back up and hurl some back. A
school debating club it ain't. You have been warned.
Good luck.
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"...Base 8 is just like base 10 really... ((o))
If you're missing two fingers." - Tom Lehrer ((O))
A Planet Visitor
"dirtdog" <nospam_...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:slrnastfj4.2aic...@lievre.voute.net...
cry-baby, especially since you have admitted you are a troll.
This 'dialog' began when I remarked, the day after the WTC attack,
when CNN showed pictures of Palestinians dancing in the street, and
honking their horns in joy --
"Yesterday it was children and old women exalting over the dead. Do
I blame THEM for the events of September 11th? You damn right I do.
I blame their moral commitment to a policy which would find pleasure
in the death of more than 10,000 humans (obviously later revised
downward), most of whom would probably have difficulty spelling 'Palestine.'
Will I EVER be able to believe that the Palestinians are REASONABLE
in any dispute they may have with ANY other people concerning what
they view as rightfully theirs? NOT A CHANCE. I may still believe
that they have such rights, in some small part. But I will NEVER AGAIN,
believe that they are REASONABLE."
This was a comment made in a lengthy post that touched on a number
of issues with you. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=2b9o7.148686%24aZ.22227043%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
From that moment on, you have distorted my words, and changed them
into other words, such as 'trust' and 'hate,' which would presume I am
'rabid anti-Arab.' The word 'reasonable' has been so distorted by you, that
one cannot but conclude that your purpose is to imply I am 'rabidly in
favor of the Jew,' and hope to portray my words as 'unreasonable.' Thus
trying to imply that ANYONE who expresses any displeasure with the
acts of the Palestinians MUST be a 'radical anti-Arab.' This is the behavior
of a 'radical anti-Jew'... who accepts NO criticism of any act taken by an Arab
against a Jew. I am NOT 'in favor of the Jew in respect to the Arab,' nor
am I 'in favor of the Arab in respect to the Jew.' Both are guilty of grave
atrocities. In fact, my comments in that same posts were --
"But before those events which I saw on the media, I felt myself more
in sympathy to the cause of the Palestinians then the Israelis. Although
I felt them both to be the typical zealot"
Now -- You would do this, because you apparently cannot HANDLE
someone trying to view the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in any way
other than 'radically anti-Israel.' In addition to the fact that I have
destroyed you in so many other issues, that you would try to distort
my words to make it appear I am 'rabidly anti-Arab.' This makes you,
in my view, a 'rabid anti-Jewish radical,' which in turn makes you
anti-Semitic.
Just as you have tried to imply that my few words above have made me
somehow 'rabidly Anti-Arab' in that conflict, I can clearly find that you
having distorted my words makes you 'rabidly anti-Jewish.' You do
not have to ever voice an 'opinion' regarding the 'right' of Israel to
exist, if you claim that anyone who criticizes ANY act of the Arab is
'rabidly anti-Arab,' which is your implication from my few words in my
post. What is true, is that if you claim that ANY criticism of any act
of the Arab makes them a 'rabid anti-Arab,' then you are obviously a
'rabid anti-Jew.'
As long as you contend that MY rather mild negative comment regarding
the behavior of some Palestinians (which I still feel was well deserved given
the act which has just been committed) makes me a 'rabid anti-Arab'...
then by implying such, it makes you a 'rabid anti-Jew.' Once you accept
the fact that I am NOT a 'rabid anti-Arab,' as you contend so frequently
based on my comment, I might reexamine your position, and accept
that you did so more because you fear or hate ME in a personal sense,
rather than actually think 'the comment' makes me a 'rabid anti-Arab.'
But as long as you THINK my mild comment makes me a 'rabid
anti-Arab,' then you obviously think ANYONE who makes such a mild
comment must also be a 'rabid anti-Arab,' and that in turn makes you
a 'rabid anti-Jew.' Since you are unable to view that conflict in a
balanced perspective.
LIve with it, and stop crying.
PV
Steve Towne
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo"
<jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
message
news:jonathan-240654...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...{snip}
JIGSAW1695
>From: " Steve Towne" cmp...@cox.net
>Date: 11/11/2002 10:55 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <jZ_z9.1340$XF5.2...@news2.west.cox.net>
The cunt from Georgia???
Steve Towne
"JIGSAW1695" <jigsa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021111232237...@mb-mp.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: hello
> >From: " Steve Towne" cmp...@cox.net
> >Date: 11/11/2002 10:55 PM Eastern Standard Time
> >Message-id: <jZ_z9.1340$XF5.2...@news2.west.cox.net>
> >
> ===============================
>
> The cunt from Georgia???
I'm not sure where she was from. The Jane who was
sympathetic to Timothy McVeigh. If I recall correctly she
had some sort of 'Poor Timmy' website. She was foolish enough
to mention her nervous breakdowns and in-patient therapy.
Eventually left in a huff. Hope she's doing better now.
JIGSAW1695
Message-id: <jG%z9.1370$XF5.2...@news2.west.cox.net>
==============================
Hmmm.... more specifically...did she champion a convicted killer and even offer
to take him into her home should he be released???
Steve Towne
> Hi APV,
>
> I get the sense that your reply was less for me, than 'for
the record'.
> Regardless, thank you for your welcome. Luckily, I have
been offered
> weapons and kevlar by Steve Towne, and also have reasonable
grasp of how
> logical fallacy can be used in debate. Consider me warned!
>
> Geena
>
>
That was Incubus who offered you weapons of mass
destruction(see Incubus post below.) Do try to keep up.
Also, most in here appreciate bottom posting. Furthermore,
snipping huge sections of irrelevant verbiage in a post to
which you're replying is likewise viewed favorably. Please
consider the above in the helpful spirit intended.
ST
A Planet Visitor
>
> I get the sense that your reply was less for me, than 'for the record'.
> Regardless, thank you for your welcome. Luckily, I have been offered
> weapons and kevlar by Steve Towne, and also have reasonable grasp of how
> logical fallacy can be used in debate. Consider me warned!
>
> Geena
>
'players' in this group. I can guarantee that you will have to
contend with Mr Coughlan at some point in the future. But,
welcome to 'Khe Sahn South' of AADP.
PV
<rest clipped>
Steve Towne
Yeees, I recall something along those lines. I really hope
she never hooked up with a parolee. Both would be the worse
for it. Wasn't there also a bought with bulimia?
Steve Towne
"
> Yeees, I recall something along those lines. I really hope
> she never hooked up with a parolee. Both would be the
worse
>
*bout
Cerberus
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
message news:jonathan-240654...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you to everyone who took the time to welcome me into this group.
I
> > have to say, my jaw hit the floor on a couple of the warnings, but
> > overall I
> > think I'll have fun here interacting with everyone.
> >
> > As for the warnings of insults and verbal attacks.. well, I guess if
> > anyone
> > feels the need, go right ahead. I like a good debate, have a sense of
> > humor, thick skin, and I'm not opposed to looking at others points of
> > view.
> >
> > Hopefully I'm not inadvertently publishing my personal details by
posting
> > this.. and if anyone notices something I should shield that may be
> > showing,
> > please feel free to contact me!
>
>
> Be aware, though, that this is a playground for those who are prepared
> to cop an arseload of abuse and still get back up and hurl some back. A
> school debating club it ain't. You have been warned.
>
> Good luck.
Arn't you glad that you came Gina.
Beware of those that practice anal intercourse. Whilst it not necessarily a
bad thing if done properly, as I am sure you are aware, there are those who
will do it to you both figuratively and physically. As a matter of fact I
know a bloke that lives just down the road a bit from you. The question you
should be asking is how I know where you live, and modify your details
accordingly.
Welcome
WooF w00f WooF
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
JIGSAW1695
Message-id: <N%1A9.1718$XF5.3...@news2.west.cox.net>
===============================
Yes, as well as a daugher, if I recall.
Oh well, all I can say is:
Let the games Begin!!!!!!!
Oh Janeieeeeeee...come on out aand playyyyyyyy!!!!!
Jürgen
GT schrieb in Nachricht ...
<reply to: "a capital punishment which is grossly reserved for those who can
not afford a reasonable defense at trial has nothing to do with arguments
like 'now this one really deserves it' or 'society's protection'">
>Hi Jurgen,
>
>Would you be pro-death penalty if you were satisfied that every capital
>murder trial defendant was provided an adequate defense?
>
>Geena
>
Hi Geena,
Firstly, no, I would not change my stance. I thought alot about whether
capital punishment can or can not be integrated in any justice system
without causing deep problems in respect to equal treatment of guilty
people, in the sense of any death-sentence's proportionality or
disproportionality to other, lesser sentences for crimes of the same order
of magnitude. I think a satisfying modification of capital punishment is not
even theoretically possible in a justice system founding on a philosophy of
individual humans' value.
Secondly to "adequate defense": As told, I were still anti-DP if reasonable
defenders (!and reasonable prosecutors!) are presenting the capital cases.
But if to any single condemned was assignable a clearly aggravated
continuing threat in comparizon to other offenders I would not publicly
critisize the US in respect to the DP. You may quite well be able to put up
any criminal's name whom's secular end I would not regret, however, the
problems with capital punishment run way deeper and play partially on a
fairly general plane.
As briefly as possible, any judge and/or juror will be confronted with two
contradictory approaches if a crime of murder is at stake. Anyone can either
emphasize on the victim frauded his life, means the irreparability of the
crime's effect and the irreversibility of the wrongdoer's guilt, or (s)he
can take the viewpoint of the offender and establish regardless the crime's
absolute nature any points which put a relativating light on the criminal's
guilt and culpability. I think that in the face of this two mutually
exclusive perspectives of one and the same deed a death sentence very often
REQUIRES an outspokenly weak defense - and that's why I raised the point. A
prosecutor who heads for an ultimative condemnation has to keep the jurors
on track, he has to coerce them to focuse on the victim and to drop any
consideration of what could provide a humane touch in any of the convicted's
personality's facets. So I deem the weak defense in capital cases not a
coincidence, but very often a calculation. I believe that a strenghtened
defense would automatically decrease the total of death sentences to near
zero.
Thirdly, the capital murder-statutes provide no sane basis for any homicidal
crime's evaluation. I do see for example no reason why murdering a 5 years
old child should automatically be cause for more a severe penalty than
murdering a 7 years old.
.....and much more's left to be said.
Sincerely
Jürgen
Rev. Don Kool
JIGSAW1695 wrote:
[...snip...]
> Yes, as well as a daugher, if I recall.
>
> Oh well, all I can say is:
>
> Let the games Begin!!!!!!!
>
> Oh Janeieeeeeee...come on out aand playyyyyyyy!!!!!
Her daughter with trichotillimania. Yes, I remember Janie. Her desire
to watch while a proven murderer violated her retarded daughter. She is
almost as vile as Karen Torley (Richey).
Yours in the glory that is our Lord Jesus Christ,
Don
--
*************************** You a bounty hunter?
* Rev. Don McDonald, SCSA * Man's gotta earn a living.
* Baltimore, MD * Dying ain't much of a living, boy.
*************************** "Outlaw Josey Wales"
Rev. Don Kool
Jürgen wrote:
> GT wrote...
>
> <reply to: "a capital punishment which is grossly reserved for those who can
> not afford a reasonable defense at trial has nothing to do with arguments
> like 'now this one really deserves it' or 'society's protection'">
>
>>Hi Jurgen,
>>
>>Would you be pro-death penalty if you were satisfied that every capital
>>murder trial defendant was provided an adequate defense?
>>
>>Geena
>>
>
>
> Hi Geena,
>
> Firstly, no, I would not change my stance.
Because your fervent wish is that proven murderers go unpunished. We
know. Thankfully the world disagrees with you.
Hope this helps,
JIGSAW1695
From: "Jürgen" K.J.H...@t-online.de
Date: 11/12/2002 7:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: <aqqpse$2jc$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
Hi Geena,
Sincerely
Jürgen
===============================
What is wrong with this picture????
Jurgen, why did your your english grammar and sentence construction suddenly
improve???
Did you really write the above message?
Have you been having some fun with us all along?
Or are you bi-polar and have emotional and intellectual peaks and valleys that
reflect your every day work.
I am really curious about this sudden change in the way you write.
Jigsaw
Jigsaw
Incubus
> I didn't think that I had any weapons, but after reading a few of the
> response strings... I may have had an incindiary grenade I wasn't aware
of!
>
> Thanks for the welcome, and offer of arms!
>
> Geena
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 08:32:03 +0000
>
>le Tue, 12 Nov 2002 01:36:46 GMT, dans l'article <OWYz9.310968$8o3.921076=
>5...@twister.austin.rr.com>, GT <gina...@yahoo.com> a dit ...=20
>
>> Hi, and thank you for your welcome! It's great to hear from people on =
>both
>> sides of this debate, and appreciate your words of warning. That havin=
>g
>> been said, and since your post was the first to fire up my love of
>> debate....I just have one quick question and observation....
>
>I'm going to answer this, Geena, as it was my words that you quoted, so I
>assume that the question was directed at me.
>
>> Do you really believe that those who are opposed to the death penalty a=
>re on
>> average more intelligent than those who are pro-death penalty?
>
>Not all, of course. However, take this newsgroup as an example. On the
>abolitionist side, you have Earl, me, QZD, dirt, Peter, and J=FCrgen. Th=
>ere
>are _very_ few who oppose the death penalty, and who are below average
>intelligence. Most of the abolitionists are university educated, highly=20
>intelligent, highly articulate.
>
>On the other side of the fence, who on the retentionist side could be=20
>considered intelligent ? Richard. Full stop. The rest (and you haven't
>been here long enough for us to know where you stand in this) are frankly
>'full-metal-jacket' idiots like incubus, Drewl (he's the 'oldno7@comcast.=
>net'
>I mentioned in a previous post), Jigsaw, Tim Drake, LDB, etc).=20=20
>
>I don't know _why_ this is, but it is clear that the more intelligent a=20
>person is, the less likely it is that he will support the death penalty.
>
>> And...if so, would this be an example of the superior intellect at work=
>?
>> :)
>
>Again, I don't know. However, as human advancement has traditionally bee=
>n
>brought about by the intelligent, who trail the flotsam along in our wake=
>, it
>is a fair bet that when the death penalty is abolished (as it will be), i=
>t will
>be we who bring that about.
>
>{ snip }
>
>--=20
>Desmond Coughlan=20=20=20=20=20
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1.bredband.com!br
edband!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!fu-berlin.de!uni-berli
n.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 08:32:03 +0000
>Lines: 53
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <3aeqqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net> <slrnastd08...@rosbif.home>
><OWYz9.310968$8o3.9...@twister.austin.rr.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037090240 13152464 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-No-Archive: true
>Mail-Copies-To: never
>X-Obsessive-Litany: http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>X-Chats: http://www.zeouane.org/chats/
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3F1F C838 88D5 2659 B00A 6DF6 6883 FB9C E34A AC93
>User-Agent: tin/1.5.14-20020926 ("Soil") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.5-RELEASE (i386))
>
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
Cerberus
> Subject: Re: hello
> From: "Jürgen" K.J.H...@t-online.de
> Date: 11/12/2002 7:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
> Message-id: <aqqpse$2jc$06$1...@news.t-online.com>
>
> Sincerely
>
> Jürgen
>
> ===============================
>
> What is wrong with this picture????
>
> Jurgen, why did your your english grammar and sentence construction
suddenly
> improve???
>
> Did you really write the above message?
> Have you been having some fun with us all along?
>
> Or are you bi-polar and have emotional and intellectual peaks and valleys
that
> reflect your every day work.
>
> I am really curious about this sudden change in the way you write.
>
>
> Jigsaw
In Jorgen's case, the reason could be as simple as getting a better
translator program.
In your case it's because there is indeed two posters. Am I correct?
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
<Cerb...@riverstyx.net> wrote:
> In your case it's because there is indeed two posters. Am I correct?
No. It would be correct to say, "In your case it's because there _are_
indeed two posters."
*runs away, crouching low and moving in a zig-zag pattern*
Cerberus
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
Khe Sahn South, I think not. Equating this N/G with Khe Sahn is to 'dis' a
lot of good men PV. My Lai is probably closer to the mark.
For those who don't know the story go
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/trenches/mylai.html
WooF woof WooF
A Planet Visitor
"Cerberus" <Cerb...@riverstyx.net> wrote in message news:3dd1d...@goliath.newsgroups.com...
>
> "A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
> news:tr0A9.265727$S8.54...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> >
> > "GT" <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:09_z9.339050$121.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
> > > Hi APV,
> > >
> > > I get the sense that your reply was less for me, than 'for the record'.
> > > Regardless, thank you for your welcome. Luckily, I have been offered
> > > weapons and kevlar by Steve Towne, and also have reasonable grasp of how
> > > logical fallacy can be used in debate. Consider me warned!
> > >
> > > Geena
> > >
> > Yes... it was 'for the record,' so you might grasp a handle on two
> > 'players' in this group. I can guarantee that you will have to
> > contend with Mr Coughlan at some point in the future. But,
> > welcome to 'Khe Sahn South' of AADP.
>
>
> Khe Sahn South, I think not. Equating this N/G with Khe Sahn is to 'dis' a
> lot of good men PV. My Lai is probably closer to the mark.
>
Yes... desi does remind me of Lt Calley
PV
Cerberus
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
> In article <3dd1d...@goliath.newsgroups.com>, "Cerberus"
> <Cerb...@riverstyx.net> wrote:
>
> > In your case it's because there is indeed two posters. Am I correct?
>
> No. It would be correct to say, "In your case it's because there _are_
> indeed two posters."
>
> *runs away, crouching low and moving in a zig-zag pattern*
O.K, O.K are, is - my ignorance is exposed.
Fuckin' grammar Czar.
Cerberus
"David McDonald" <David_M...@subspacemail.com> wrote in message
news:cdm3tuon9ld3noui9...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:40:41 +0800, "Cerberus"
> <Cerb...@riverstyx.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
> >news:tr0A9.265727$S8.54...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> >>
> >> "GT" <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:09_z9.339050$121.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
>
Unlike you, I have no fixation with Desi. My gently chiding comments were
directed to PV, simply pointing out the (IMO) inappropriate reference he
made to Khe Sahn. My reference to My Lai was designed to reflect the chaos,
mindless direction and lack of morality sometime found in this N/G.
Your reference to Dien Bien Phu merely serves to illustrate what is was, a
long, couragous battle fought by soldiers on both sides whose name and
memory should not be sullied by your flippant reference to them.
For France, Dien Bien Phu was a watershed of colonial aspirations, coupled
with the old world idiosyncrasies of Gen. Charles de Gaulle and his desire
to dominate somebody, anybody.
For Vietnam, Dien Bien Phu was the start of the long trek forward and the
emergence of Gen. Ho Chi Min as the country's unifier.
How many of our American correspondents know that Ho Chi Min adopted the
constitution of the U.S in his Declaration of Independence from France, and
actually approached the U.S for help? He got the bum's rush in Washington
and Chairman Mao was happy to step in.
A little bit of help early might have been cheaper for everybody in the long
run methinks. Ah for the enlightenment that hindsight bestows.
Go here for some light reading on the subject
http://www.dienbienphu.org/english/
{David's brash comments snipped, but keep trying David, you WILL improve and
be accepted back into polite society, sooner or later}
WooF w00f WooF
Cerberus
>
> "David McDonald" <David_M...@subspacemail.com> wrote in message
> news:cdm3tuon9ld3noui9...@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:40:41 +0800, "Cerberus"
> > <Cerb...@riverstyx.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
> > >news:tr0A9.265727$S8.54...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> > >>
> > >> "GT" <gina...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > >news:09_z9.339050$121.9...@twister.austin.rr.com...
My apologies to all for my mis-spelling of Ho Chi Minh in my previous post.
A Plenary Verbositor
"David McDonald" <David_M...@subspacemail.com> wrote:
> "Cerberus" wrote:
> >
> >{David's brash comments snipped, but keep trying David, you WILL improve
and
> >be accepted back into polite society, sooner or later}
> >
> >WooF w00f WooF
>
> OK Ceberus, you can have lunch with us on Friday. Just don't
> embarrass us.
>
You forgot to tell him to bring no recording device to your greasy little
hovel and to not disturb your intricate arrangement of mirrors. I will
assume you have a gas mask ready for him.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Richard J
>
> Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DCFFD96...@hotmail.com>...
>
> <snip>
> >
> >False claims in your opinion, Jürgen, not in mine.
>
> Nope. That I would have called *any* criminal reformable is bluntly false -
> nothing about IMO or IYO, there is no passage in the archive to support this
> your claim. There are however several passages where I stated that a few
> offenders are too dangerous to allow any return into general society.
>
> >
<snip>
> >> I expressed my standpoint with abundant clarity, while you'd like to pin
> any
> >> silly slogans at me.
> >
> >THAT is debatable. Your clarity is sometimes obtuse due to your
> >peculiar use of English at times. I wish I could speak German so we
> >communicated in your language without such problems, but then you would
> >probably find my German confusing just as I sometimes find your English.
> >
>
> My limited command of the English language made it often necessary to go a
> somewhat lenghtier way in expressing my points. I did so, and you proved by
> your replies to have EXACTLY understood my argumentation.
That time I understood correctly, although I was not completely sure at
the time. Other times I haven't, and I am never quite sure when you go
into lengthy discourses if I correctly understand you or not.
>
> <snip>
<snip>
> >
> >I understand that. It does take a great deal of time sometimes to
> >arrive at the rightful punishment of capital murderers when petition and
> >appeals are filed without the least chance of the condemned being
> >innocent.
>
> No, you obviously yet do not understand.
> Is there any appeal of a guilty which were justified IYO?
>
> I've seen too many lawyers who admitted their client's guilt
> >who yet continued to file appeal and writ after writ in delaying tactics
> >for twenty or more years. Those types of appeals and writs don't have a
> >damned thing to do with the fact that the murderer actually committed
> >the crime, but are filed to delay the inevitable in hopes that the
> >system will change somehow and the client will get LWOP instead of
> >juiced.
>
> And? The statement: 'I did the crime and am guilty, but I am no aggravated
> and continuing threat'
That was decided by the jury or judge when sentencing in the first
place.
makes perfectly sense and is (a) legitime and well
> may be (b) justified within your own law's framework. It is rather that you
> are GENERALLY unable/unwilling to make distinctions between guilties.
>
> <snip>
>
> >> >> The standard is pretty clear in the face of SCOTUS-justices who
> expressed
> >> >> the opinion that a sleeping lawyer is no reason to declare the trial
> >> >> invalid.
> >> >
> >> >That is one case and is not a standard.
> >>
> >> Nope. The one case is not what is at stake here. It is the
> SCOTUS-justices'
> >> opinion which equates a general admission to a defense-standard so low
> that
> >> it is enough if the defense-lawyer did not sleep all over the trial.
> >
> >Wrong. It is their decision in this one case. Another case might well
> >be filed under the EXACT circumstances, and be successful. What you
> >fail to recognize here, Jürgen, is that SCOTUS can, and does, make
> >rulings on individual cases some time which ONLY effect that case and no
> >others. In other instances, they make a ruling on a widespread action
> >which effects all similar cases, and they are very careful to make those
> >distinctions in their opinions.
>
> Name me the phase of a trial when it is of no importance that the defense is
> awake. (...The entire penalty phase, perhaps? Guilt has been established,
> and the waffle about 'continuing threat' or 'mitigating circumstances' is
> totally subordinated?)
I didn't say I did not find what happened in that trial at least
unwanted. All I said is that you claim one such ruling by SCOTUS sets
the course for all such rulings, and that is not necessarily true.
SCOTUS may rule on an individual basis and their ruling only effect that
individual trial, as happened in this case. That does no preclude
SCOTUS from ruling on another trial in exactly the same circumstances
with a completely different outcome.
SCOTUS rules based on precedent, yes, but the presidents are
constitutional in nature. In this trial, it was ruled no violation of
constitutional nature was found. That does not set a precedent for
subsequent trials of similar nature. If it did, any irregularity which
did not effect the basic truth of the verdict of a trial would be
allowed, and that is not the case.
<snip>
> >> >Prove it.
> >>
> >> The thesis: "Since (a) and (b) are true the US have executed innocents
> p.F.
> >> with high likelihood" requires no more proof than given by good
> observation.
> >> What you demand for is certainty - which was not claimed by me.
> >>
> >> J.
> >
> >That is only because it cannot be claimed any more than it can be
> >claimed we have wrongfully executed, or will never wrongfully execute,
> >someone. The question becomes one of reasonable doubt. IMO, there is
> >no reasonable doubt that the possibility exists just as you have no
> >reasonable doubt the reality does. Neither of us, though, have proof of
> >such an act.
> >
> >You are accusing the state of committing a horrible wrong based upon at
> >best circumstantial evidence. IMO, you have not proven guilt beyond a
> >reasonable doubt. I must find the state so far innocent of wrongdoing
> >until such a time as you have better and conclusive evidence. It isn't
> >enough in this instance to claim that where there is smoke there's
> >fire. You are going to have to actually prove the fire.
> >
>
> I am of diametrically different opinion here, Richard. It is you and your
> state who wants to execute humans, NOT ME. So it is YOUR VERY MINIMAL
> obligation to create a procedure which leaves no reasonable doubts in its
> accuracy, at the very, very least in view of the trivialest question at
> trial whether the charged did the deed at all. I raised REASONED and GRAVE
> doubts, and this is way sufficient to shake the capital punishment-system in
> its fundaments.
Obviously your statements are not sufficient to shake the government
here since after reading your publicly stated doubts we still have the
death penalty
I'm making a joke about your statement Jürgen.
<Just in case your Teutonic sense of humor missed it.>
Teflon
Richard J
Damn, Jürgen! A simple no would have answered the question.
Teflon
Richard J
I can offer her an old Swedish Mauser 6.5x55.
I have another just like it that I sporterized. It shoots 1/2 MOA with
factory ammo. Used it to kill Bambi's mother yesterday. Head shot from
170 meters dead center between the eyes. Venison tonight!!
Teflon
Jürgen
Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DD26A89...@hotmail.com>...
<snip>
>> Is there any appeal of a guilty which were justified IYO?
>>
>> I've seen too many lawyers who admitted their client's guilt
>> >who yet continued to file appeal and writ after writ in delaying tactics
>> >for twenty or more years. Those types of appeals and writs don't have a
>> >damned thing to do with the fact that the murderer actually committed
>> >the crime, but are filed to delay the inevitable in hopes that the
>> >system will change somehow and the client will get LWOP instead of
>> >juiced.
>>
>> And? The statement: 'I did the crime and am guilty, but I am no
aggravated
>> and continuing threat' ....
>
>That was decided by the jury or judge when sentencing in the first
>place.
>
Exactly. And this decision can be challenged as meaning- and rightfully as
can be challenged the question of guilt/innocence.
........makes perfectly sense and is (a) legitime and well
>> may be (b) justified within your own law's framework. It is rather that
you
>> are GENERALLY unable/unwilling to make distinctions between guilties.
>>
<snip>
>> Name me the phase of a trial when it is of no importance that the defense
is
>> awake. (...The entire penalty phase, perhaps? Guilt has been established,
>> and the waffle about 'continuing threat' or 'mitigating circumstances' is
>> totally subordinated?)
>
>I didn't say I did not find what happened in that trial at least
>unwanted. All I said is that you claim one such ruling by SCOTUS sets
>the course for all such rulings, and that is not necessarily true.
>SCOTUS may rule on an individual basis and their ruling only effect that
>individual trial, as happened in this case. That does no preclude
>SCOTUS from ruling on another trial in exactly the same circumstances
>with a completely different outcome.
Richard, this is babble, sorry. If the Highest Court ponders over the
question whether a sleeping lawyer could perhaps be tolerated in one special
trial then there follows clearly that a sleeping lawyer does not indicate a
totally desinterested and insufficient defense. This means furthermore in
all clarity that judge and jurors, who all saw the guy napping, had not
acted most recklessly by their ignorance, but that this can and may happen
again, exactly with the permission of the SCOTUS.
A joke which I'll give a serious answer to.
This doubts has ANYONE who's fitted with halfway observative and analytic
skills, American legal experts included. That the horrible state of American
capital punishment has no direct impact on the States' governments is
reasoned exclusively in the targets of the death penalty.
Jürgen
Richard J
>
> Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DD26A89...@hotmail.com>...
>
> <snip>
>
> >> Is there any appeal of a guilty which were justified IYO?
> >>
> >> I've seen too many lawyers who admitted their client's guilt
> >> >who yet continued to file appeal and writ after writ in delaying tactics
> >> >for twenty or more years. Those types of appeals and writs don't have a
> >> >damned thing to do with the fact that the murderer actually committed
> >> >the crime, but are filed to delay the inevitable in hopes that the
> >> >system will change somehow and the client will get LWOP instead of
> >> >juiced.
> >>
> >> And? The statement: 'I did the crime and am guilty, but I am no
> aggravated
> >> and continuing threat' ....
> >
> >That was decided by the jury or judge when sentencing in the first
> >place.
> >
>
> Exactly. And this decision can be challenged as meaning- and rightfully as
> can be challenged the question of guilt/innocence.
Not exactly. A capital murder can challenge sentencing in a capital
murder case without challenging the guilty verdict. Just as true is
that the murderer can challenge the whole trial and have only the
sentencing phase set aside but not the verdict since the verdict and the
sentence are two different things. It is not uncommon in Texas, for
example, for a guilty murderer and his legal representation to challenge
the penalty. Johnny Penry springs to mind immediately. There is no
question, and his lawyers have never challenged his guilt in the murder
of his victim. What has been challenged is the sentence based upon the
instructions or lack of instructions given the jury on two previous
penalty phase trials. Following the third penalty phase trial, Penry
was again sentenced to death, and it is quite likely this one will stick
unless the SCOTUS changes its makeup in the next couple of years. With
the Republican majority in both houses of congress, that is very
unlikely to happen.
>
> ........makes perfectly sense and is (a) legitime and well
> >> may be (b) justified within your own law's framework. It is rather that
> you
> >> are GENERALLY unable/unwilling to make distinctions between guilties.
> >>
> <snip>
>
> >> Name me the phase of a trial when it is of no importance that the defense
> is
> >> awake. (...The entire penalty phase, perhaps? Guilt has been established,
> >> and the waffle about 'continuing threat' or 'mitigating circumstances' is
> >> totally subordinated?)
> >
> >I didn't say I did not find what happened in that trial at least
> >unwanted. All I said is that you claim one such ruling by SCOTUS sets
> >the course for all such rulings, and that is not necessarily true.
> >SCOTUS may rule on an individual basis and their ruling only effect that
> >individual trial, as happened in this case. That does no preclude
> >SCOTUS from ruling on another trial in exactly the same circumstances
> >with a completely different outcome.
>
> Richard, this is babble, sorry. If the Highest Court ponders over the
> question whether a sleeping lawyer could perhaps be tolerated in one special
> trial then there follows clearly that a sleeping lawyer does not indicate a
> totally desinterested and insufficient defense. This means furthermore in
> all clarity that judge and jurors, who all saw the guy napping, had not
> acted most recklessly by their ignorance, but that this can and may happen
> again, exactly with the permission of the SCOTUS.
>
Wrong, Jürgen. The legal system isn't a machine punching out widgets.
Each case is individually tries on its own merits, and each case has the
equal weight in appeal. If the SCOTUS does make a landmark ruling, that
ruling will effect all subsequent legal proceedings where applicable.
SCOTUS did not make a landmark ruling in this instance, therefore it doe
snot do what you claim.
No doubt. You are always as serious as a priest at a mass funeral.
>
> This doubts has ANYONE who's fitted with halfway observative and analytic
> skills, American legal experts included. That the horrible state of American
> capital punishment has no direct impact on the States' governments is
> reasoned exclusively in the targets of the death penalty.
>
> Jürgen
Whatever.
Teflon
Incubus
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
<Cerb...@riverstyx.net> wrote:
> "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote
> in
> message news:jonathan-A61730...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> > In article <3dd1d...@goliath.newsgroups.com>, "Cerberus"
> > <Cerb...@riverstyx.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In your case it's because there is indeed two posters. Am I correct?
> >
> > No. It would be correct to say, "In your case it's because there _are_
> > indeed two posters."
> >
> > *runs away, crouching low and moving in a zig-zag pattern*
>
> O.K, O.K are, is - my ignorance is exposed.
>
> Fuckin' grammar Czar.
Some bastard's gotta do it given that Rennie seems to have fucked off,
at least for the time being.
Jürgen
Richard J schrieb in Nachricht <3DD2B871...@hotmail.com>...
<....>
See...it does not matter at all whether this decision is a landmark. It is
simple logic: If the Highest Court decides once that a sleeping lawyer is no
reason to conclude automatically and instantly to a fundamentally weak
defense and a deeply flawed trial, then further judges and juries will see
defenders sleep and think: "The verdict and conviction may well be valid,
though. He may sleep all along, let's proceed - the SC will decide finally,
and overturn the sentence if necessary."
Sometimes I really have to ask myself what I am doing here - there's
absolutely no question about what a sleeping defender means.
<....>
>>
>> A joke which I'll give a serious answer to.
>
>No doubt. You are always as serious as a priest at a mass funeral.
>
The death penalty IS a mass funeral.
J.
Richard J
Not at all. Most people in the US are not even aware of the ruling in
this case. Others saw the press release and then promptly forgot about
it. Only when there is something which effects us nationwide such as
the Miranda case, does the public take much notice of it.
>
> Sometimes I really have to ask myself what I am doing here - there's
> absolutely no question about what a sleeping defender means.
You are here the same as the rest of us. There is no real hope that
anything we do in the rather small circle who frequent this news group
will really change anything. We are here to make our feelings known on
the subject through discussion and perhaps to entertain ourselves and
others. There's no possibility that what we do here will actually make
a difference. If you think differently, you are bound ot be
disappointed.
>
> <....>
>
> >>
> >> A joke which I'll give a serious answer to.
> >
> >No doubt. You are always as serious as a priest at a mass funeral.
> >
>
> The death penalty IS a mass funeral.
>
> J.
No. It is the death of those who murdered. If you want to be sad about
the demise of murderers, fine. I would much rather be sad about their
victims.
Teflon
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 17:37:59 +0000
>
>le Mon, 11 Nov 2002 07:58:40 GMT, dans l'article
><QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
><abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
>> Note --- this is a long post... but necessary. Since Desmond
>> has attempted to 'justify' his behavior here.
>
>LOL ... 'long post' ? No shit ! It's going to take a day or to for me to
>wade through the veritable pool of stinking, waist-high pigshit that
>constitutes these lines. I certainly will snip a lot, for my point has
>been made (and reinforced in your follow-up ... and I thank you). Indeed,
>I say without hesitation that you have done an even better job than I, in
>ensuring that no one takes you seriously. For whilst my post will have
>laid the 'ground- work' for Geena (and any other newbie) to gauge what
>exactly you're all about, your response was the 'cement' between the
>bricks. Who could have failed to note the 'crack!' as my post hit NNTP
>servers across the globe ? When the smoke cleared, what did AADP see ? A
>wizened old man, dressed in white, and wearing Jesus sandals, walking
>towards them. In his left arm was cradled a stone tablet, bearing
>inscriptions in ancient Hebrew. His right hand held aloft a blazing
>crucifix. His beard shook as in a thin, reedy voice, he cried, 'Repent,
>sinners !!' At least Geena will now know not to 'fornicate' before
>marriage ... at least she will now know not to wear a short skirt ... at
>least she will now know not to listen to 'rock-'n'-roll music !!' For if
>she does, verily, the Angel Gabriel (or LDB ... 'difficult to tell them
>apart) will smite her. Anyone here who doubted what an emotionally
>unstable, immature, petulant, racist, homophobic, semi-literate,
>anti-Semitic, attention-seeking religious bigot you truly are, will no
>longer doubt. You will never know how grateful I am to you, for having
>helped the cause of abolitionism. _Thank you_ !!
>
>Of course, this 900 line-long litany of sanctimonious self-pity, would not
>have existed, had I not posted my 325 lines of witty, prosaic destruction of
>all that you 'stand for' (sic) on the newsgroup that is
>news:alt.activism.death-penalty. So perhaps I will take a little credit.
>
>However, let us begin. I have the heavy-duty gloves on, and the gas mask.
>I can now plunge into the choking, sulphur-laden 'crepuscule' that descends
>upon news:alt.activism.death-penalty whenever you come to 'poison' us, and
>make us give thanks to whatever 'God' we worship, that we were not born
>you.
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Greetings, Geena, and welcome to the group. Contrary to what some of the
>>> more ... erm ... intellectually challenged members of this newsgroup have
>>> said, you can expect your stay here to be fulfilling.
>
>> I have clipped much of Desmond's ravings here, because they are simply
>> ravings.
>
>Geena will soon come to realise that what you describe as 'ravings', are
>in fact points that are too awkward for you. We have seen it only these
>past couple of days, when rather than explaining to the group how you
>could possibly justify calling for a contract killing to be carried out
>on another poster, you prefer to accuse those taking you to task, as
>'raving'. Yet you are on record as calling for that killing to be carried
>out. You see, Geena, what I meant when talking about LDB's now infamous
>hypocrisy ? Whilst decrying those who murder, LDB seeks to encourage
>others to murder. Irrespective of whether he now claims that he meant
>'window cleaning contract' or not, the facts remain. He committed
>incitement to murder.
>
>> But certain points he mentions demand a response. One general
>> truism you should realize is that Desmond Coughlan is a consummate and
>> pathological liar. To even begin to understand Desmond, two self-evident
>> facts must be recognized --
>
>Of course, what you won't tell Geena is that I am a 'liar' only in your
>'mind' (sic) (not that it matters; she'll see it with time, just like
>everyone else here). You might well 'believe' that I have lied, but others
>have sought to prove such (cf. Trinity, Mateo), but there is absolutely no
>evidence that I have done such a thing on this newsgroup. Indeed, my
>'lies' are a figment of your imagination, and you make liberal use of
>usenet, to say things that saying in 'real life' would result in a lawsuit
>for libel. No other poster here (who matters) considers me a liar ...
>whereas _your_ lies are a matter of public record, and _everyone_ has
>observed this fact. Like accusing dirtdog of being an 'anti-Semite', and
>in fact even inventing a 'quote' (sic). Like accusing me of claiming that
>all Arabs are 'ragheads', or that all Germans smell of 'sausage', taking
>out of context satirical comments in another thread. That is dishonesty.
>Like calling for me to be murdered, and then denying it barely hours later.
>That is dishonesty. Like accusing me of 'preferring' murder to release of
>a prisoner. That is dishonesty. Like accusing 'Just Passing By' of
>calling Judge 'Sobel' (sic) a crook. That is dishonesty.
>
>Dishonesty is your stock-in-trade.
>
>> 1) He claims he is a Jew -- No one believes him.
>
>Whereas my 'religion' is of no importance, and I do not use it in AADP,
>other than to lend context to historical events. You will not see me
>beating the Torah, and holding above a blazing Star of David, as you do
>with your 'religion', when you ram it down everyone's throat in this
>newsgroump.
>
>> Because he USES that
>> to provide all forms of comments derogatory toward the Jews, and presumes
>> calling himself a Jew... provides justification for his remarks. He has
>gone
>> so far as to claim he speaks 'fluent Hebrew,' and that his 'family' were
>> victims of the holocaust. Yet his name is Coughlan, and he comes from
>> Ireland.
>
>And your name is Sergei, and you come from Russia. So what ? But lest
>Geena be in any doubt, she will (I assume) note that you just slipped in
>another lie, in claiming that I said I speak Hebrew. I _used_ to speak it
>fluently, but have not used it for many years. You're a liar ... ho, ho,
>ho, it's like watching a suicidal man jump off the same building, every
>single day of the week.
>
>> is all part of the persona he wishes to present here. Since no one
>believes
>> that he came from anything but an abusive childhood, which provided the
>> improper nurturing we see in 'present-day' Desmond. Otherwise, God has
>> played a ghastly trick on our species when He constructed the genes of
>> Desmond.
>
>Of course, the 'web educated one' can't find any mention of my father on
>the Strathclyde Police website, so that means 'he didn't exist'. *guffaw*
>Guess what: I can't find any mention of you ... my God, you're not only a
>pathetic, semi-literate, gay-and-black-hating 'Green-Carder' almost-was ...
>but you're non-existent as well !! ROTFLMAO !
>
>> Every comment Desmond provides can be placed into one of ten
>> GIMMICKS that he uses...
>
>In fact, the 'gimmicks' is yet another unoriginal response from LDB, which
>I first used several months ago. His first gimmick was the famous 'FDP',
>which in itself was yet more unoriginal 'plagiarizm' (sic). Geena, ask LDB
>about that 'dolly' escapade, and about how he has sunk so low, that he has
>to plagiarise from _billytwat_. I mean ... _billytwat_ ?? As for 'FDP',
>he had to remind news:alt.activism.death-penalty of what it meant, in every
>single post that he made. He decided to drop it, as whilst 'LDB' has
>passed into news:alt.activism.death-penalty history, as a synonym for 'A
>Planet Visitor' (I got a call from _The OED_ last week, asking if they
>could include it in their next edition), LDB is now forced to 'plagiarize'
>(sic) from billytwat ... and nothing ... _nothing_ speaks more eloquently
>than that, to his downfall.
>
>{ snip 'GIMMICK's' (sic) }
>
>> There is also no doubt that he has a perverted sexual appetite, which
>> is frequently demonstrated in his lust for 14-year-old nymphets. He
>> once said to another poster "send that 16-year-old niece of yours
>> around to give me a blowjob whenever I want one." See
>>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl638869775d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&
oe=UTF-8&selm=diablo-F5D718.22561113012002%40ne
>> wsroom.utas.edu.au
>
>Heh ... sometimes it's delightful to watch a man commit 'hari-kiri' (sic).
>
> ' his lust for 14-year-old nymphets'
>
> ...
>
> '"send that 16-year-old niece of yours"'
>
>*guffaw!*
>
>> He once posted his impression of the last 43 seconds of a teenage
>> female murder victim, and related how "As she falls, her skirt rides up
>> over her hips. The man notes that she isn't wearing panties. 'I shoulda
>> raped her first, the whore ..."
>
>Yes indeed, but only you would be retarded (think 'relative', LDB ... think
>'relative' ... LOL !!) enough to attribute character traits and emotions
>found in a work of fiction, with the real character traits and emotions of
>the writer. Still, as 'character' and 'traits' are 'big words' that you
>might not yet have 'gotten' (sic) around to translating from Russian, we
>shouldn't hold it against you.
>
>{ snip }
>
>>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20020817212931.10131.00000274%40mb-f
o.aol.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
>Whilst I am flattered that you wish to let Geena see my fabulous work of
>fiction, she will (I am sure) note that the Message-ID of the post in this
>URL, is 20020817212931...@mb-fo.aol.com. As I do not post from
>AOL, once again a 'splat!' is heard, and the yolk of a rotten egg goes down
>your chin. LOL ... this is _wonderful_ !!
>
>In fact, Geena, the Message-ID of my little 'short story', concerning the
>immense cruelty of the death penalty, and of how it is not only _as bad as_
>murder, but _worse_, is ...
>
> slrnalt3ds.al9.pasde...@lievre.voute.net
>
>As you will see, LDB did _not_ post _my_ article, but a response to it.
>LOL ... then he'll wonder why we all laugh at him. ROTFLMAO !
>
>> In general, he totally avoids any issue relating to the DP, concentrating
>> more on his anti-American passion, and his hate for humanity in
>> general, while creating many issues which have nothing to do with the DP.
>> Those issues he creates almost always have some perversion involved in
>their
>> creation, or express some form of a *giggle* at tragedy.
>
>LOL ... I'm _literally_ cackling with laughter to see the 'hate' (sic)
>present in these attempts to 'turn [Geena] against me'. But of course, you
>'don't care' about the opinions of 'others' ... no, no ... 900 lines, but
>you don't care ... bwaaahahahahahaaaa !!!!
>
>(now Geena, watch LDB jump obediently to attention, and relate the above to
>'sheep' (no, no one else understands why, either ... but it's a little
>thing that he stole from billytwat and now claims as his own) ... despite
>the fact that it is accepted that a text-only medium like usenet, will
>have onomatopoeic words (look it up, FW) to express laughter, amusement,
>etc.)
>
>> GIMMICK # 8 -- Recently, as his mental decline progresses, this has become
>> his 'favorite.' Providing NOTHING except a meaningless kindergarten insult
>> which is what I've now referred to as 'mindless drivel.' In point of fact,
>I have
>> kept track of such 'mindless drivel,' and it has reached more than 200
>since
>> only 25 October. You can find that in my 'daily summary' of his drivel in
>> the posts titled "desi 'mindless drivel'" And if today is any indication,
>his decline
>> is accelerating. You can instantly recognize much of his 'mindless
>drivel,' since
>> it usually includes the words
>
>Translation ... and this is a 'keeper' ... LDB claims that he's not
>responding to me ... even though he now responds to 100% of my posts ...
>count 'em, Geena ... one hundred percent ! No, stop laughing, he's totally
>serious ... he really _does_ think that he's 'kicking some ass [sic]' ...
>incredible, isn't it ?
>
>> GIMMICK # 9 -- He uses what was once analyzed by St. George (a most
>> observant and prescient poster), who formerly contributed here, that which
>> has come to be known as St. George Seminal Axiom 6) -- 'When faced with
>> utter defeat... simply clip everything and claim victory.'
>
>Indeed, St George is well remembered for another one of his observations,
>namely that when you post utter cack, and get called on it ... you claim
>that it was a troll. Would anyone here like to recall to whom that
>particular observation was directed ?
>
>Step forward, Little Dancing Boy !
>
><fx: applause>
>
>In fact, not only that ... but the 'St. George Seminal Axiom 6)' was also
>being directed at LDB ... so he will now claim that 'others' (just before
>they begin 'posting to others' (*chortle*) are doing what _he_ is most
>famous for. Delicious, isn't it ??!! Oh stick around AADP, Geena ...
>there are many more spankings where that one came from !
>
>> GIMMICK # 10. His general use of an insult, containing nothing else. For
>> example he once called the Mother who had just had her son murdered -
>> perverse. See
>>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn8o8gdj.iit.desmond%40lievre.vout
e.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
>Now this is one of the occasions when LDB in fact _does_ post a URL to an
>article by me. However, what he will _not_ mention ...safe in the
>knowledge that almost no one will bother to read his URLs ... sorry,
>'URL's' (sic and LOL !), is that later on in that thread, I gained the
>support of every poster contributing that thread, at that time. Obviously,
>my comment that deathies are perverse is borne out by empirical evidence
>(cf. Gallup, CNN poll of 24/11/01, and BBC-Guardian poll, 'what are your
>sexual fantasies ?' of 11/01/02, also Sacramento Sun ...
>
>1. You are a retentionist. In the past twelve months, which of the
> following activities have you engaged in, at least three times ?
>
> helping old ladies cross the road ....................... 12%
>
> being honest with a police officer ...................... 8%
>
> paying for your purchases in a store .................... 8%
>
> assault on spouse ....................................... 79%
>
> rape of a minor ......................................... 78%
>
> torture of domestic pet ................................. 88%
>
> murder .................................................. 88%
>
> bestiality .............................................. 97%
>
> devil worship .......................................... 100%
>
>2. You are an abolitionist. In the past twelve months, which of the
> following activities have you engaged in, at least three times ?
>
> helping old ladies cross the road ....................... 99%
>
> being honest with a police officer ...................... 96%
>
> paying for your purchases in a store .................... 98%
>
> assault on spouse ....................................... 1%
>
> rape of a minor ......................................... 0%
>
> torture of domestic pet ................................. 1%
>
> murder .................................................. 0%
>
> bestiality .............................................. 0%
>
> devil worship ........................................... 2%
>
>3. You are a retentionist. Which of the following most disturbs
> you about this view ?
>
> the possibility that there might be an innocent ......... 3%
>
> they won't let me watch his execution ................... 96%
>
> they don't televise it ................................. 99%
>
> I get this friction rash on my 'privates' after each
> execution .............................................. 96%
>
> the fact that I cast no reflection in mirrors .......... 95%
>
>4. You are an abolitionist. Which of the following most pleases
> you about this view ?
>
> we're right ........................................... 100%
>
> we can walk into a darkened room and flood it with
> Light ................................................. 100%
>
> we're not deathies ................................... 2,500%
>
> we can sleep at night ................................. 100%
>
>5. You are a retentionist. Cite the four main reasons why you
> are in favor [sic] of capital punishment.
>
> it deters .............................................. 78%
>
> it turns me on ......................................... 98%
>
> it prevents build-up of sperm in the testicles ........ 94%
>
> can you repeat the question ? ......................... 100%
>
>...), but let us not forget that my comment was not that the mother (if
>such is indeed the case, for chronic dishonesty is endemic among deathies
>... was this person really a grieving mother ? Was this person even
>_female_ ??) was perverse, but that her desire to see blood spilled was
>perverse. This view has been supported both by studies by the National
>Academy of Science, as well as by the American Bar Association. Deathiesm
>is linked both to devil worship, and to bestiality. Whether we care to
>look down into the pit, to gaze upon their cruel, lifeless, yellow eyes ...
>to listen to their babbling in the Black Tongue ... to risk the bites from
>the snakes that writhe in their hair ... we cannot deny the obvious:
>deathies are perverse.
>
>> This woman, assuming the handle 'bobbyc,' had come here temporarily trying
>> to find some understanding in respect to the horrendous murder of her son.
>
>Sure she had. Geena, a word of advice: do not trust AOL subscribers.
>Their accounts come like a deathie at an execution, and go with as much
>ceremony.
>
>> Rather than attempt to understand her pain... desi quite literally
>*giggled* as
>> he punched her in her emotional gut.
>
>*cackle*
>
>Can you hear the 'fist' slamming into the Bible ? 'he punched her in her
>emotional gut' ... bwaaaahahahahahahahaaa !!!!
>
>(look, here comes another 'billytwat' joke ...)
>
>> Stating to her "your rather perverse taste
>> for state-sponsored murder." There is, in fact, a clear indication that
>> he is an 'angry drunk' as well... since when he does post using this
>GIMMICK
>> it is obvious that he is most probably drunk at the time.. and like many
>drunks...
>> when he gets drunk he gets brutal.
>
>LDB is once again claiming 'telepathy'. What a pity that he won't mention
>his belief that I 'beat' my wife. Then again, as every poster on
>news:alt.activism.death-penalty slapped him down for that one ...
>
> 'I note that you have recently decided to add wife beating
> to the imaginary list of Desmond's "crimes"' [1]
>
>Even John Rennie, hardly the poster most sympathetic to me (and the same
>John Rennie who believes that you lie to make a point), points out that
>LDB's obsessive desire to score just one ... just one point ... was leading
>him to attribute to me all the ills of mankind ... ask him how he believes
>that I'm the reincarnation of Gengis Khan ... LOL, Jesus I'm gonna bust a
>gut, I'm laughing so much ... and the Plague ? Yep, that was me, too. And
>Jesus, how I wish I hadn't started the Great Fire of London ... oh, and if
>only I hadn't shot that guard during the Great Train Robbery ... *LMAO!!*
>
>> This relates to all his GIMMICKS,
>
>Shouldn't that be 'GIMMICK'S' ?
>
>> since he has never held a dialog which has not ended up with him using
>> one of his GIMMICKS in raging fury...
>
><fx: _explodes_ into laughter !!>
>
>> ending up slamming his forehead against his desk.
>
>... as I fall into a deep sleep. Yep, no doubt about it ... LDB's been
>contacted by seven pharmaceutical companies, as their insomnia cures are in
>need of new 'input' ...
>
>> He was certainly drunk when he posted to bobbyc, and
>> most probably drunk during most of his tirades.
>
>ROTF-F-FLMAO !! Sniff, Geena ... that smell ? It's desperation, mixed
>with the smell of burning butt-skin ... Jesus, shut down that airport, the
>pilots ... sorry, 'pilot's' (sic) can't see a thing !!
>
>>> i) You get from news:alt.activism.death-penalty what you put in. The
>>> simple fact that you are a retentionist will not automatically attract
>>> any abuse or insults.
>
>> PV writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- Right off the bat -- another lie. Clearly
>> when you first present any argument in support of the DP, you will be
>> confronted with a barrage of insults of various form from Desmond. To
>> demonstrate this truism, allow me to present just three of his many
>> various comments directed at ALL retentionists, who he refers to as
>> 'deathies.' --
>
>The proof (no, I said 'pRoof' !! Get your 'poof[sic]-hater' hat off !) of
>the pudding is in the eating, and of course, Geena will note that she has
>not been subject to any abuse from me. Indeed, I even e-mailed her
>privately, with advice (or 'advise', if you prefer ... *snort!*) on how to
>secure her PC. <sigh> Yet _another_ LDB lie splashes into the ocean ...
>Jesus, you're not having it easy of late, are you ..?
>
>> 1) "When we as abolitionists, gaze down into the pit, and see the teeming
>> mass of deathies. When we shield our noses from the fetid stench of
>> rotting corpses mixed with the fresh smell of semen. When we look upon
>> their squat, evil faces, and yellow hate-filled eyes ... we, as dwellers
>> of the Light, have a moral duty to lift them from their vile, repulsive,
>> bestial fantasies. We must show them that orgasming over death, is not
>> the way that they show their humanity.
>> We are their betters. Unquestionably better. They dwell in the darkness.
>> We must bring them to the Light."
>
>As indeed we must. Hey, I'm a literary (or 'literry', as you would say)
>genius ... but I'm once more peeved. You haven't mentioned my other stroke
>of prosaic genius, so allow me ...
>
> Lest you be led astray by the snake-haired filth that is the 'Axis of
> Idiocy' (LDB, Zod the Clod, Pappy, and Jigsaw), let me remind you that
> news:alt.activism.death-penalty is an _unmoderated_ forum. That means
> that just as my post was an off-topic troll, so Jigsaw's mentioning the
> arrest of crocodile-shagging prostitutes in downtown Melbourne, is. Or
> of Zod the Clod trying to get a date with Drewl. Or of Pappy showing
> us 'How Two Spel Korrektly, Chapter 1'. Or any of LDB's 'e-mails to
> self' that are his posting history here.
>
>> 2) "I engage in 'abuse' of deathies as a matter of course. That's what
>they're
>> there for. `echo $DEITY` gave them to us, much as She gave sparrows to
>> the domestic cat. They're our playthings. They have no relevance in the
>> real world, except to remind us of the dark side to human nature, that can
>> exist in all of us. They're like child rapists. Nazis. Torturers of
>> small animals.
>> All this pretence of 'let's be civil to one another' is nauseating. How
>can
>> you be 'civil' to garbage ?"
>
>What can I say, I'm gifted. Sparrows and cats ... a truly ground-breaking
>metaphor.
>
>> 3) "The deathies will look upon his departure, wipe the saliva from their
>chins,
>> and go back to masturbating over images of the 'gurney' (sic), or the
>> electric chair. We, the moral masters, the abolitionists, must show them
>> the huge damage that they have done, by driving out the only reasonable
>> one in their filthy midst."
>
>Are you trying to get me a publishing contract ?
>
>> Expect much of the same to be directed toward you personally, once
>> you offer any argument in support of retention.
>
>There _is_ no argument 'in support of retention', other than a Beavis and
>Butthead laugh, followed by, 'Oh, that feels good ... faster, don't stop,
>baby ... oooh, yeah ... oh yeah, I'm gonna spurt ... he's in the chair ...
>flick the switch ... ooooh ... ahhh ... urgh !!!'
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> It is axiomatic that support for the death penalty is inversely
>>> proportional to IQ.
>
>> GIMMICK # 2 from Desmond's arsenal of GIMMICKS. The presumption of a
>> 'superior' intellect, coming from someone who, when he encounters a term
>> that is unfamiliar to him, calls the poster 'pseudo-intellectual.' And
>> for someone who lacks the slightest understanding of 'logic,' it is a
>> wonder that the word 'axiomatic' does not cause his hand to freeze to the
>> keyboard.
>
>Yet once more must we ask how, a poster who cannot use apostrophes ...
>sorry, 'apostrophe's' (sic) ... who thinks that 'quote' is a noun ... who
>believes that we can 'give advise' (sic), and that the phrase 'I'd like to
>advice [sic] you' is correct ... or who thinks that the Irish are in fact
>just 'potato-munching Brit's [sic]' ... or who believes that 'portentious'
>is a word ... or who cannot 'finf [sic] Newfound [sic]' on a map ... or
>that Americans ... sorry, 'American's' (sic) who criticise him, have
>'European flavor [sic]', whilst Americans who are pro-DP (sic) have
>American 'flavor' (sic) ... (oh Jesus, where does his idiocy _end_ ??) ...
>a poster capable of such magnificent idiocy ... yet we are to believe that
>he is versed in the classics, and that he understands words like
>'eisoptrophobia' ... LOL !!
>
>Hands up all those who believe him ...
>
>*deathly silence*
>
>>> There are a few disruptive posters on this group. One of them, you ca
>>> recognise by the e-mail address 'old...@comcast.net'. He also posts
>>> under several aliases, including (but not restricted to)
>>> billy...@aol.com and David_M...@subspacemail.com. Do not be
>>> fooled by these e-mail addresses: it is the same person posting under
>>> all three.
>
>> GIMMICK # 3 -- An obvious lie. Everyone knows they are three
>> different posters. Desmond just cannot 'handle the truth.'
>
>Of course, LDB and Rush 'Lapdog' Wickes are the only two here who believe
>that Don 'I-Ride-My-Wife's-Bike' Kool is not currently posting as billytwat
>and 'David_M...@subspacemail.com'. Thankfully, and in another
>'own-goal', LDB has ensured that the 'Scum Doctrine' has now been invoked.
>The mere fact that he, abolitionist par excellence, has just said that they
>are different people, means that all of news:alt.activism.death-penalty is
>now convinced that they are not. Another one for the Light-Dwellers.
>Thanks, LDB. Still, let's not even _talk_ about LDB's constant use of
>'everiwon [sic] knows ...' followed by another mendacious accusation of
>eating virgins.
>
>>> His posts always end with the word 'Rev.', but he is not a minister.
>>> He obtained his 'ordination' from an online website :
>>> http://www.ulc.org/ One of my cats also got 'ordained' from the same
>>> website, and there are some other posters here who became 'ministers'
>>> on the same website, to poke fun at this particular idiot. His real
>>> name is Donald McDonald (no, really, I'm not joking !), and he is a
>>> child abuser (his website used to boast about how he 'set' his Pit
>>> Bull Terrier to savage his daughter's face) and convicted felon.
>
>> GIMMICK # 3 -- More obvious lies. In fact, Desmond has
>> accused MANY of being pedophiles here,
>
>If the glove fits.
>
>> as he now accuses 'Donald McDonald.'
>
>There I thought I was accusing Drewl. Still, thanks for confirming that
>they're the same person.
>
>> Desmond presumes such insults provide an 'argument,' when
>> in fact they are part of the most obscene behavior demonstrated from any
>> poster here. He certainly does not have the slightest idea who I am,
>> yet he has called ME a pedophile on a number of occasions. Here
>> are six examples of his words directed to me on six separate occasions
>> in his posting history--
>
>Oh-oh ... are we about to see some more 'quotes' made by other's (sic) ..?
>
>> 1) "It might have flown right over your pointy little
>> redneck head as said head was bobbing up and down over
>> Dwight-the-Altar-Boy-From-Tampa's crotch" See
>>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=diablo-7F7BB2.00235902032002%40newsr
oom.utas.edu.au&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
>Jesus, now I'm QZD !! Ha, ha, ha !!!
>
>{ snip remainder of URL's (sic) made by other's (sic) }
>
>> So you decide for yourself if Desmond is possessed of a mind that is
>> not perverted. Why would he call ME... a handle that is totally unknown
>> to him... a pedophile ... unless he is at a loss for a rational response,
>> and must rely on the most perverted insults imaginable?
>
>Hey, like I say, Sergei, if the glove fits, right ?
>
>> Further, he has also called many others homosexuals, including me,
>> believing that constitutes an 'insult' in HIS homophobic rage.
>
>Whereas being called 'gay' immediately gives rise to frantic,
>Bible-thumping denials, accompanied by ...
>
> 'Some of my best friend's [sic] are faggo ... er, I mean,
> gay's [sic] !!'
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> He also posted my late mother's address to this newsgroup, asking others
>>> to 'go pay her a visit'. If you run a quick search on google, you'll
>>> also find references to where he advised the mother of a handicapped
>>> child to 'just smother the little cunt', and where he advocated raping
>>> female abolitionists, so that 'the bitches know what it's like to be a
>>> victim'.
>
>> PV Writes -- GIMMICKS # 7 and # 10 -- GIMMICK # 7 demonstrates
>> that Desmond's own perverted char
A Planet Visitor
whine from one side of their mouth, and lie from the other.
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:npv5ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Mon, 11 Nov 2002 07:58:40 GMT, dans l'article <QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
> > Note --- this is a long post... but necessary. Since Desmond
> > has attempted to 'justify' his behavior here.
>
> LOL ... 'long post' ? No shit ! It's going to take a day or to for me to
> wade through the veritable pool of stinking, waist-high pigshit that
> constitutes these lines.
That sounds just like the squeal emitted by a pig when he's
been skewered. And notice how very 'articulate' the insults
are . While lacking everything else.
> I certainly will snip a lot, for my point has
> been made (and reinforced in your follow-up ... and I thank you).
You've never had a valid 'point' in your life, sport. It's all ranting
and raving in your racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American drivel.
Which expresses 'true love' for murderers (who you call 'victims'
and refer to the real victims as responsible for being murdered),
and Elmer Gantry religious ravings, demanding that others pick
up the flag of your crusade, and wipe retentionists from the face
of the earth. I believe we went through such a period before. It
was called the Inquisition, and led by those who think just as you
do.
> Indeed,
> I say without hesitation that you have done an even better job than I, in
> ensuring that no one takes you seriously. For whilst my post will have
> laid the 'ground- work' for Geena (and any other newbie) to gauge what
> exactly you're all about, your response was the 'cement' between the
> bricks. Who could have failed to note the 'crack!' as my post hit NNTP
> servers across the globe ? When the smoke cleared, what did AADP see ? A
> wizened old man, dressed in white, and wearing Jesus sandals, walking
> towards them. In his left arm was cradled a stone tablet, bearing
> inscriptions in ancient Hebrew. His right hand held aloft a blazing
> crucifix. His beard shook as in a thin, reedy voice, he cried, 'Repent,
> sinners !!'
Again, you have this inability to 'look in the mirror,' since I am not entreating
God to 'punish' those who disagree with my agenda. It's you who
presumes 'God is on my side.' God is actually on no one's side.
> At least Geena will now know not to 'fornicate' before
> marriage ... at least she will now know not to wear a short skirt ... at
> least she will now know not to listen to 'rock-'n'-roll music !!' For if
> she does, verily, the Angel Gabriel (or LDB ... 'difficult to tell them
> apart) will smite her. Anyone here who doubted what an emotionally
> unstable, immature, petulant, racist, homophobic, semi-literate,
> anti-Semitic, attention-seeking religious bigot you truly are, will no
> longer doubt. You will never know how grateful I am to you, for having
> helped the cause of abolitionism. _Thank you_ !!
>
I do believe you simply clipped and pasted what I have already
recognized in you, and presumed it constitutes some form of
'denial' by accusing me of the same. Just as you do with your
homophobia, lies, racist comments and blatant bigotry.
<snip some 'mindless drivel' posing as a presumed insult>
> >> Greetings, Geena, and welcome to the group. Contrary to what some of the
> >> more ... erm ... intellectually challenged members of this newsgroup have
> >> said, you can expect your stay here to be fulfilling.
>
> > I have clipped much of Desmond's ravings here, because they are simply
> > ravings.
>
> Geena will soon come to realise that what you describe as 'ravings', are
> in fact points that are too awkward for you.
Nah... sorry, desi... they're just ravings. Everyone but you can see
that.
> We have seen it only these
> past couple of days, when rather than explaining to the group how you
> could possibly justify calling for a contract killing to be carried out
> on another poster, you prefer to accuse those taking you to task, as
> 'raving'. Yet you are on record as calling for that killing to be carried
> out. You see, Geena, what I meant when talking about LDB's now infamous
> hypocrisy ? Whilst decrying those who murder, LDB seeks to encourage
> others to murder. Irrespective of whether he now claims that he meant
> 'window cleaning contract' or not, the facts remain. He committed
> incitement to murder.
>
GIMMICK # 3 -- Nowhere will you find any mention of my expressing a
'contract to kill.' As usual, desi makes these claims, but NEVER
backs them up with the actual words. He is a master at distortion.
> > But certain points he mentions demand a response. One general
> > truism you should realize is that Desmond Coughlan is a consummate and
> > pathological liar. To even begin to understand Desmond, two self-evident
> > facts must be recognized --
>
> Of course, what you won't tell Geena is that I am a 'liar' only in your
> 'mind' (sic) (not that it matters; she'll see it with time, just like
> everyone else here).
Actually, I provide rather clear evidence of your lies. While you only
offer empty denials, and cross-accusations which are lies.There is
no doubt that some dark and disturbing character flaws rest in
the deep recesses of your dirty mind. I have taken it as my task to
bring them 'into the light.'
> You might well 'believe' that I have lied, but others
> have sought to prove such (cf. Trinity, Mateo), but there is absolutely no
> evidence that I have done such a thing on this newsgroup.
I have already provided proof of your lies, using your own words. There
is no necessity for me to provide that same proof over and over, simply
because you deny what is a fact.
> Indeed, my
> 'lies' are a figment of your imagination, and you make liberal use of
> usenet, to say things that saying in 'real life' would result in a lawsuit
> for libel.
ROTFLMAO.. in 'real life' you would be prosecuted for the most
libelous statements possible, regarding lies about someone having
been convicted of a crime. The penalties for your crime, in such
lies, would be substantial.
> No other poster here (who matters) considers me a liar ...
> whereas _your_ lies are a matter of public record, and _everyone_ has
> observed this fact. Like accusing dirtdog of being an 'anti-Semite', and
> in fact even inventing a 'quote' (sic).
It is not a lie to find someone to be what I find him to be. Clearly if
someone is lying, it is dirtbag, who has made the most disgusting
accusations regarding me in respect to Arabs, because I found those
who danced in the street after 9-11 to be 'unreasonable.' My exact
word, which dirtbag CHANGED into other forms, as you have tried
to do, with YOU saying "ragheads," a word which has NEVER been
posted as MY word here or anywhere. In fact, it is both you and dirtbag
who 'invent' quotes. As you did with my words regarding O.J. Simpson
for one example. In point of fact, I again find the Palestinians to be
'unreasonable' as they have been recorded as again dancing in the
streets in some macabre 'dance of death' over the latest murder of
Israelis going to prayer. Nonetheless, I find the 'cause' of the
Palestinians, that of the creation of a Palestinian state, and the
abandonment of settlements in the West Bank to be 'reasonable.'
I just do not find the rank and file Palestinian to be 'reasonable,'
having been fed poison for so long by their 'leaders.' Just as
you would try to presume yourself to be 'the High Priest' of YOUR
evil 'gospel' and feed your poison to those you hope are part of YOUR
congregation.
> Like accusing me of claiming that
> all Arabs are 'ragheads', or that all Germans smell of 'sausage', taking
> out of context satirical comments in another thread.
Actually, what 'smells' is your claim that your disgusting words
represent 'satire.' Everyone here fully understands that word has
no meaning to you, except as an 'excuse' to spread your venom,
and then claim it was 'satire' or 'irony.' They're YOUR WORDS,
sport. You'll have to eat them.
> That is dishonesty.
> Like calling for me to be murdered, and then denying it barely hours later.
> That is dishonesty. Like accusing me of 'preferring' murder to release of
> a prisoner.
Actually, your word was 'gamble.' You are willing to 'gamble' the
lives of innocents to release a murderer... Theodore Frank to be
exact... hardly your run-of-the-mill 'prisoner,' as you'd like it to
seem. Are you now denying you didn't use the word 'gamble'
in respect to freeing Theodore Frank?
> That is dishonesty. Like accusing 'Just Passing By' of
> calling Judge 'Sobel' (sic) a crook. That is dishonesty.
>
> Dishonesty is your stock-in-trade.
>
I'll not apologize for that any further. JPB did not 'call' Judge
Zobel a crook in so many words. But there was most certainly
the implication that he had done so. Since JPB stated that the
judge KNEW Louise Woodward was not guilty, and he had the
power to overturn the guilty verdict and find her not guilty, but
he DID NOT DO SO. Taking this to its rather moral and logical
conclusion, only a crooked judge would do such a thing. Or
do you presume that judges SHOULD find guilty those they
KNOW are not guilty?
What is truly dishonest, is what you did in respect to your
insults provided to me, when you were totally wrong about
what Judge Zobel has the power to do, and failed to apologize
for those insults. Claiming insults can be given in 'good faith.'
ROTFLMAO. Only you could come up with a claim that
insults are offered in 'good faith.' Only you!!
> > 1) He claims he is a Jew -- No one believes him.
>
> Whereas my 'religion' is of no importance, and I do not use it in AADP,
> other than to lend context to historical events. You will not see me
> beating the Torah, and holding above a blazing Star of David, as you do
> with your 'religion', when you ram it down everyone's throat in this
> newsgroump.
>
Of, but you HAVE tried to USE it to your advantage. To draw some
'pity' toward your sick behavior. I've clearly recognized you as the
'Uncle Tom' of Jewry, if anyone even believes it. Further, your
pathetic appeal for 'pity,' when you claimed that your 'family' was
'taken' in the holocaust is another disgusting display of your
hoping to wring some sympathy for yourself from the group. As
for me.... I have clearly stated that the DP is a secular penalty
for a secular crime - MURDER. And I have no problem with that.
Nor does religion or even a belief in a creator have anything to do
with that. As with your presumed Jewry, you would try to use
'my religion' to contend it impacts my views on the DP, and that
is total horseshit... and everyone knows it. You are the one who
has tried to place a 'religious' meaning into this secular argument,
with your pathetic 'Universal right to life,' presuming God has passed
this down to the few within your society, as His 'Eleventh Commandment.'
Becoming YOUR COMMANDMENT... not mine. Actually, God doesn't
have a damn thing to do with MURDER or the DP. They are both the
works of men. But you are unable to grasp that simple idea, and
need desperately to put a 'religious' spin on it.
> > Because he USES that
> > to provide all forms of comments derogatory toward the Jews, and presumes
> > calling himself a Jew... provides justification for his remarks. He has gone
> > so far as to claim he speaks 'fluent Hebrew,' and that his 'family' were
> > victims of the holocaust. Yet his name is Coughlan, and he comes from
> > Ireland.
>
> And your name is Sergei, and you come from Russia. So what ? But lest
> Geena be in any doubt, she will (I assume) note that you just slipped in
> another lie, in claiming that I said I speak Hebrew. I _used_ to speak it
> fluently, but have not used it for many years. You're a liar ... ho, ho,
> ho, it's like watching a suicidal man jump off the same building, every
> single day of the week.
>
Like riding a bicycle, sport, when one is 'fluent' in a language, it does
not disappear. Nor can you claim 'age' has diminished your abilities,
since you are only 33 (I believe). All in all, everyone recognizes it
as just more of your pathetic need to embellish your 'credentials'
in life, hoping to provide some substance to comments which are
devoid of any substance. And one clearly sees that you are now
in 'pitiful insult' mode, painfully aware you have been caught out.
> > is all part of the persona he wishes to present here. Since no one believes
> > that he came from anything but an abusive childhood, which provided the
> > improper nurturing we see in 'present-day' Desmond. Otherwise, God has
> > played a ghastly trick on our species when He constructed the genes of
> > Desmond.
>
> Of course, the 'web educated one' can't find any mention of my father on
> the Strathclyde Police website, so that means 'he didn't exist'. *guffaw*
> Guess what: I can't find any mention of you ... my God, you're not only a
> pathetic, semi-literate, gay-and-black-hating 'Green-Carder' almost-was ...
> but you're non-existent as well !! ROTFLMAO !
>
The meaning of your 'claim' that your father was a 'copper,' is again to
draw 'recognition' toward your comments. It's almost as good as 'claiming'
he was a 'judge,' but you figured that perhaps you 'couldn't get away'
with that one. Of course, everyone knows that you presume anyone
who has recognized that YOU are a homophobic and a racist, must
themselves be one, for having 'found you out.' You will note that I
provide 'PROOF' using YOUR WORDS to show you are both a
homophobic and a racist. You simply use empty insults.
> > Every comment Desmond provides can be placed into one of ten
> > GIMMICKS that he uses...
>
> In fact, the 'gimmicks' is yet another unoriginal response from LDB, which
> I first used several months ago. His first gimmick was the famous 'FDP',
> which in itself was yet more unoriginal 'plagiarizm' (sic). Geena, ask LDB
> about that 'dolly' escapade, and about how he has sunk so low, that he has
> to plagiarise from _billytwat_. I mean ... _billytwat_ ?? As for 'FDP',
> he had to remind news:alt.activism.death-penalty of what it meant, in every
> single post that he made. He decided to drop it, as whilst 'LDB' has
> passed into news:alt.activism.death-penalty history, as a synonym for 'A
> Planet Visitor' (I got a call from _The OED_ last week, asking if they
> could include it in their next edition), LDB is now forced to 'plagiarize'
> (sic) from billytwat ... and nothing ... _nothing_ speaks more eloquently
> than that, to his downfall.
>
Does anyone find anything there but 'mindless drivel'? Frantic raving,
about LDB, FDP, YFD, and billytwat? Next desi will claim he 'invented'
the word GIMMICK. Now he could only do so, if he had said
GIMMICK...GIMMICK...GIMMICK. While twirling three times within
his evil pentagram.
> { snip 'GIMMICK's' (sic) }
>
> > There is also no doubt that he has a perverted sexual appetite, which
> > is frequently demonstrated in his lust for 14-year-old nymphets. He
> > once said to another poster "send that 16-year-old niece of yours
> > around to give me a blowjob whenever I want one." See
> >
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl638869775d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=diablo-F5D718.22561113012002%40ne
> > wsroom.utas.edu.au
>
> Heh ... sometimes it's delightful to watch a man commit 'hari-kiri' (sic).
>
> ' his lust for 14-year-old nymphets'
> ...
> '"send that 16-year-old niece of yours"'
>
> *guffaw!*
*guffaw*??? More of your 'articulate' arguments, desi???
But there is no doubt that 'Old enough to bleed... old enough to butcher,'
is your 'motto,' you pervert. There have been too many instances in the
past, and many, not just me, have recognized your unhealthy appetite
for very young teenage girls. Such as lusting after the 'firm, comely,
sixteen-year-old thighs' of Sarah Hughes after watching her win the ice
skating championships. And the 'victim' of your imaginary murder, who
just ALSO happened to be a young female teenager. Imagine that... what
a coincidence. Obsession perhaps?
> > He once posted his impression of the last 43 seconds of a teenage
> > female murder victim, and related how "As she falls, her skirt rides up
> > over her hips. The man notes that she isn't wearing panties. 'I shoulda
> > raped her first, the whore ..."
>
> Yes indeed, but only you would be retarded (think 'relative', LDB ... think
> 'relative' ... LOL !!) enough to attribute character traits and emotions
> found in a work of fiction, with the real character traits and emotions of
> the writer. Still, as 'character' and 'traits' are 'big words' that you
> might not yet have 'gotten' (sic) around to translating from Russian, we
> shouldn't hold it against you.
>
Oh, there was no doubt that the front of your pants was stained with
semen drippings as you described how she 'wore no panties,' and
exposed her pubic area as she fell dead to the floor. You were
literally salivating as you wrote the description.
> { snip }
>
> Whilst I am flattered that you wish to let Geena see my fabulous work of
> fiction, she will (I am sure) note that the Message-ID of the post in this
> URL, is 20020817212931...@mb-fo.aol.com. As I do not post from
> AOL, once again a 'splat!' is heard, and the yolk of a rotten egg goes down
> your chin. LOL ... this is _wonderful_ !!
>
Confession is good for the 'soul,' desi. You really should try to admit
your own words, and not hide behind lies. After all, what ARE YOU,
if you cannot defend your own words, and need to hide behind lies
which deny those words as your own? Ooopss... why that makes
you a liar... gee... we already knew that.
> In fact, Geena, the Message-ID of my little 'short story', concerning the
> immense cruelty of the death penalty, and of how it is not only _as bad as_
> murder, but _worse_, is ...
>
> slrnalt3ds.al9.pasde...@lievre.voute.net
>
> As you will see, LDB did _not_ post _my_ article, but a response to it.
> LOL ... then he'll wonder why we all laugh at him. ROTFLMAO !
>
That is because he hides his posting history from google, Geena. And we
all know the reason for that. Nonetheless, his words are in the google
reference I provided, if he wishes to 'deny' any specific word which
appears in that URL, he should address what he wishes to deny, because
regardless of his laughable denials, they are HIS words.
> > In general, he totally avoids any issue relating to the DP, concentrating
> > more on his anti-American passion, and his hate for humanity in
> > general, while creating many issues which have nothing to do with the DP.
> > Those issues he creates almost always have some perversion involved in their
> > creation, or express some form of a *giggle* at tragedy.
>
> LOL ... I'm _literally_ cackling with laughter to see the 'hate' (sic)
> present in these attempts to 'turn [Geena] against me'. But of course, you
> 'don't care' about the opinions of 'others' ... no, no ... 900 lines, but
> you don't care ... bwaaahahahahahaaaa !!!!
bwaaahahahahahaaaa !!!!???? More of your 'articulate' arguments, desi???
Actually, it is just GIMMICK # 8 -- 'mindless drivel' followed by that typical
'articulate' 'bwaaaahahahahahaaa' with a bunch of exclamation marks added
to 'emphasize' his inability to construct a meaningful sentence.
I certainly 'don't care' about the opinions of 'others.' I am here to
mostly identify your ravings as perverted. A job I find most distastful...
rather like cleaning up doggy po. But most certainly a job which
must be done, because doggy po begins to stink if you just leave
it there.
>
> (now Geena, watch LDB jump obediently to attention, and relate the above to
> 'sheep' (no, no one else understands why, either ... but it's a little
> thing that he stole from billytwat and now claims as his own) ... despite
> the fact that it is accepted that a text-only medium like usenet, will
> have onomatopoeic words (look it up, FW) to express laughter, amusement,
> etc.)
>
We certainly express laughter and amusement reading your posts. Except
for the times when we weep over the depravity that so easily falls from your
pen. Your particular comment here was one that brought only amusement.
After all... didn't you claim it was 'pseudo-intellectual' to use words 'too big'?
And especially those that have no meaning in respect to the comment you
are trying to express. When I used Apate and eisoptrophobia, they had
some very relevant application to the meaning of my post... The obvious
use of 'deceit' by another, and the fear of 'looking into the mirror' and
seeing yourself. While yours is just... just.... just.... dare I say it?
'pseudo-intellectual.'
> > GIMMICK # 8 -- Recently, as his mental decline progresses, this has become
> > his 'favorite.' Providing NOTHING except a meaningless kindergarten insult
> > which is what I've now referred to as 'mindless drivel.' In point of fact, I have
> > kept track of such 'mindless drivel,' and it has reached more than 200 since
> > only 25 October. You can find that in my 'daily summary' of his drivel in
> > the posts titled "desi 'mindless drivel'" And if today is any indication, his decline
> > is accelerating. You can instantly recognize much of his 'mindless drivel,' since
> > it usually includes the words
>
> Translation ... and this is a 'keeper' ... LDB claims that he's not
> responding to me ... even though he now responds to 100% of my posts ...
> count 'em, Geena ... one hundred percent ! No, stop laughing, he's totally
> serious ... he really _does_ think that he's 'kicking some ass [sic]' ...
> incredible, isn't it ?
Actually, that's simply another lie. In fact, my daily examination shows
that there were 319 posts of desi in just the past 21 days, that
contained NOTHING but 'mindless drivel' that I did not respond to,
but merely consolidated HIS OWN words from those 319 posts into
19 daily posts of my own. In fact, it is IMPOSSIBLE to respond to
ALL of desi's drivel, since it so consumes him that he has no life at
all. In my active reader, which only goes back to 8 November, there
are still 318 active posts from desi. While I have generated 144 posts
in that same time. Now, mathematics has NEVER been one of desi's
strong suits (he could not solve a simple arithmetic problem which
was presented here in the past), but a child can see that if desi has
posted 318 posts, I would naturally have also needed to post that
same number just to KEEP UP with him, even if every one of my posts
was to one of his posts.
> > GIMMICK # 9 -- He uses what was once analyzed by St. George (a most
> > observant and prescient poster), who formerly contributed here, that which
> > has come to be known as St. George Seminal Axiom 6) -- 'When faced with
> > utter defeat... simply clip everything and claim victory.'
>
> Indeed, St George is well remembered for another one of his observations,
> namely that when you post utter cack, and get called on it ... you claim
> that it was a troll. Would anyone here like to recall to whom that
> particular observation was directed ?
>
> Step forward, Little Dancing Boy !
>
St George and I had many disagreements. And there is no question
that he posted quite a bit of ca-ca himself. Nonetheless, GIMMICK
# 9 is in reference to YOUR posts. You are the one who uses SG
Seminal Axiom 6). Everytime I see a <clip>, and a one-word post
from you of
*snigger*
*snort*
*cackle*
*boo*
*bwahahhahaha*
*chortle*
*guffaw*
*wheeze*
*dribble*
*cough*
*quack*
*clang*
or
*chuckle*
It is a 'classic' demonstration of your use of this axiom (you do know what
an 'axiom' is now, don't you -- after I explained it to you? Because in your
ENTIRE posting history here, over these many years - you NEVER used
that word, until I introduced you to it!).
> <fx: applause>
>
> In fact, not only that ... but the 'St. George Seminal Axiom 6)' was also
> being directed at LDB ... so he will now claim that 'others' (just before
> they begin 'posting to others' (*chortle*) are doing what _he_ is most
> famous for. Delicious, isn't it ??!! Oh stick around AADP, Geena ...
> there are many more spankings where that one came from !
>
No, actually it was not. Which again demonstrates the way you
distort (lie??). It was in a post to John Rennie, but directed toward
Richard -- ses
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=9jj2tf%24t7j%241%40news6.svr.pol.co.uk&output=gplain
I was the one who recognized the 'insight' in the six points, and in fact
they had been lost on St.George himself, who did not recognize how
true they were, until I reminded him of his own words.
> > GIMMICK # 10. His general use of an insult, containing nothing else. For
> > example he once called the Mother who had just had her son murdered -
> > perverse. See
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn8o8gdj.iit.desmond%40lievre.voute.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
> Now this is one of the occasions when LDB in fact _does_ post a URL to an
> article by me.
LOL... You mean before you found out how to 'hide' your posting
history. So it becomes 'beyond denying.' Everyone... pay attention...
desi WOULD deny this post.... if he COULD deny this post.
Wow... has desi 'gone' off the deep end of sanity? Or has desi 'went'
off the deep end of sanity? Let's see... 50% vote for the former.
And 50% vote for the latter.
> ...), but let us not forget that my comment was not that the mother (if
> such is indeed the case, for chronic dishonesty is endemic among deathies
> ... was this person really a grieving mother ? Was this person even
> _female_ ??) was perverse, but that her desire to see blood spilled was
> perverse.
Actually, you found her 'perverse' because her son's blood had been
spilled, and you effectively told her to 'quit whining' about it, that the
murderer was the 'true' victim.
> This view has been supported both by studies by the National
> Academy of Science, as well as by the American Bar Association. Deathiesm
> is linked both to devil worship, and to bestiality. Whether we care to
> look down into the pit, to gaze upon their cruel, lifeless, yellow eyes ...
> to listen to their babbling in the Black Tongue ... to risk the bites from
> the snakes that writhe in their hair ... we cannot deny the obvious:
> deathies are perverse.
>
ho ho ho... And that from the one who says he doesn't put a 'religious'
spin on the DP. Actually, desi is one of the more bigoted people I have
ever seen put pen to make words. Stupid, silly, clumsy, evil words,
of course... but words nevertheless.
> > This woman, assuming the handle 'bobbyc,' had come here temporarily trying
> > to find some understanding in respect to the horrendous murder of her son.
>
> Sure she had. Geena, a word of advice: do not trust AOL subscribers.
> Their accounts come like a deathie at an execution, and go with as much
> ceremony.
>
Ah, yes... hiding again behind the 'big lie.' How often we have seen that.
> > Rather than attempt to understand her pain... desi quite literally *giggled* as
> > he punched her in her emotional gut.
>
> *cackle*
>
*cackle*???? More of your 'articulate' arguments, desi???
> Can you hear the 'fist' slamming into the Bible ? 'he punched her in her
> emotional gut' ... bwaaaahahahahahahahaaa !!!!
>
> (look, here comes another 'billytwat' joke ...)
>
Well, thank you, desi... for proving my point.
> > Stating to her "your rather perverse taste
> > for state-sponsored murder." There is, in fact, a clear indication that
> > he is an 'angry drunk' as well... since when he does post using this GIMMICK
> > it is obvious that he is most probably drunk at the time.. and like many drunks...
> > when he gets drunk he gets brutal.
>
> LDB is once again claiming 'telepathy'. What a pity that he won't mention
> his belief that I 'beat' my wife. Then again, as every poster on
> news:alt.activism.death-penalty slapped him down for that one ...
>
> 'I note that you have recently decided to add wife beating
> to the imaginary list of Desmond's "crimes"' [1]
>
There is a certain imagery that we see in posters generated by their
words. There is no doubt that you are an angry, and very cruel man.
I am almost certain in my mind that this anger and cruelty translates
into your real life. There is no other conclusion I can reach, since that
is the ONLY imagery I see. Further, I cannot but believe in light of
your erratic behavior in posting and many of your comments, that you
are 'a slave to the demon rum.' A drunk... in the vernacular. Probably
gin, from the reaction I see from you in your posts.
> Even John Rennie, hardly the poster most sympathetic to me (and the same
> John Rennie who believes that you lie to make a point), points out that
> LDB's obsessive desire to score just one ... just one point ... was leading
> him to attribute to me all the ills of mankind ... ask him how he believes
> that I'm the reincarnation of Genghis Khan ... LOL, Jesus I'm gonna bust a
> gut, I'm laughing so much ... and the Plague ? Yep, that was me, too. And
> Jesus, how I wish I hadn't started the Great Fire of London ... oh, and if
> only I hadn't shot that guard during the Great Train Robbery ... *LMAO!!*
>
desi getting a bit hysterical again. He is 'responsible' for none of the
ills of mankind. HE IS 'ONE OF the ills of mankind.' That's the
difference. In respect to his 'gospel' of hate that he preaches against
all retentionists, there is no question that it resembles the same
methods that Genghis Khan used. Read his own words, only a
few comments above, in respect to all retentionists. Read his uncaring
words in respect to a mother who had just had her son murdered.
Of course those methods are similar to those of Genghis Khan,
and just about any member of any 'white power' group as well.
> > This relates to all his GIMMICKS,
>
> Shouldn't that be 'GIMMICK'S' ?
>
Only if you mean your use of your GIMMICK # 1 -- presuming some non-existent
pedantic meaning.
> > since he has never held a dialog which has not ended up with him using
> > one of his GIMMICKS in raging fury...
>
> <fx: _explodes_ into laughter !!>
>
'explodes' is more likely the operative word.
> > ending up slamming his forehead against his desk.
>
> ... as I fall into a deep sleep. Yep, no doubt about it ... LDB's been
> contacted by seven pharmaceutical companies, as their insomnia cures are in
> need of new 'input' ...
>
Ah... I perceive that the 'bottle' is getting to you, and your thoughts are
beginning to wander.
> > He was certainly drunk when he posted to bobbyc, and
> > most probably drunk during most of his tirades.
>
> ROTF-F-FLMAO !! Sniff, Geena ... that smell ? It's desperation, mixed
> with the smell of burning butt-skin ... Jesus, shut down that airport, the
> pilots ... sorry, 'pilot's' (sic) can't see a thing !!
>
Do you see any denial there, Geena? Of course not. All you'll find is
GIMMICKS # 8 and #10 -- 'mindless drivel' and meaningless 'articulate'
(ho ho ho) insults.
> >> i) You get from news:alt.activism.death-penalty what you put in. The
> >> simple fact that you are a retentionist will not automatically attract
> >> any abuse or insults.
>
> > PV writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- Right off the bat -- another lie. Clearly
> > when you first present any argument in support of the DP, you will be
> > confronted with a barrage of insults of various form from Desmond. To
> > demonstrate this truism, allow me to present just three of his many
> > various comments directed at ALL retentionists, who he refers to as
> > 'deathies.' --
>
> The proof (no, I said 'pRoof' !! Get your 'poof[sic]-hater' hat off !) of
> the pudding is in the eating, and of course, Geena will note that she has
> not been subject to any abuse from me. Indeed, I even e-mailed her
> privately, with advice (or 'advise', if you prefer ... *snort!*) on how to
> secure her PC. <sigh> Yet _another_ LDB lie splashes into the ocean ...
> Jesus, you're not having it easy of late, are you ..?
>
GIMMICK # 10 -- meaningless insults. And some 'articulate' use of
*snort* but this time with only one exclamation mark. He's getting
more drunk by the moment.
> > 1) "When we as abolitionists, gaze down into the pit, and see the teeming
> > mass of deathies. When we shield our noses from the fetid stench of
> > rotting corpses mixed with the fresh smell of semen. When we look upon
> > their squat, evil faces, and yellow hate-filled eyes ... we, as dwellers
> > of the Light, have a moral duty to lift them from their vile, repulsive,
> > bestial fantasies. We must show them that orgasming over death, is not
> > the way that they show their humanity.
> > We are their betters. Unquestionably better. They dwell in the darkness.
> > We must bring them to the Light."
>
> As indeed we must. Hey, I'm a literary (or 'literry', as you would say)
> genius ... but I'm once more peeved. You haven't mentioned my other stroke
> of prosaic genius, so allow me ...
>
> Lest you be led astray by the snake-haired filth that is the 'Axis of
> Idiocy' (LDB, Zod the Clod, Pappy, and Jigsaw), let me remind you that
> news:alt.activism.death-penalty is an _unmoderated_ forum. That means
> that just as my post was an off-topic troll, so Jigsaw's mentioning the
> arrest of crocodile-shagging prostitutes in downtown Melbourne, is. Or
> of Zod the Clod trying to get a date with Drewl. Or of Pappy showing
> us 'How Two Spel Korrektly, Chapter 1'. Or any of LDB's 'e-mails to
> self' that are his posting history here.
>
Yep... he's getting more woozy.
<clipped some drunken ravings in pity for his decline>
> >> It is axiomatic that support for the death penalty is inversely
> >> proportional to IQ.
>
> > GIMMICK # 2 from Desmond's arsenal of GIMMICKS. The presumption of a
> > 'superior' intellect, coming from someone who, when he encounters a term
> > that is unfamiliar to him, calls the poster 'pseudo-intellectual.' And
> > for someone who lacks the slightest understanding of 'logic,' it is a
> > wonder that the word 'axiomatic' does not cause his hand to freeze to the
> > keyboard.
>
> Yet once more must we ask how, a poster who cannot use apostrophes ...
> sorry, 'apostrophe's' (sic) ... who thinks that 'quote' is a noun ... who
> believes that we can 'give advise' (sic), and that the phrase 'I'd like to
> advice [sic] you' is correct ... or who thinks that the Irish are in fact
> just 'potato-munching Brit's [sic]' ... or who believes that 'portentious'
> is a word ... or who cannot 'finf [sic] Newfound [sic]' on a map ... or
> that Americans ... sorry, 'American's' (sic) who criticise him, have
> 'European flavor [sic]', whilst Americans who are pro-DP (sic) have
> American 'flavor' (sic) ... (oh Jesus, where does his idiocy _end_ ??) ...
> a poster capable of such magnificent idiocy ... yet we are to believe that
> he is versed in the classics, and that he understands words like
> 'eisoptrophobia' ... LOL !!
>
> Hands up all those who believe him ...
>
> *deathly silence*
>
Does anyone believe any longer that desi is now 'in the bag'?
> >> There are a few disruptive posters on this group. One of them, you ca
> >> recognise by the e-mail address 'old...@comcast.net'. He also posts
> >> under several aliases, including (but not restricted to)
> >> billy...@aol.com and David_M...@subspacemail.com. Do not be
> >> fooled by these e-mail addresses: it is the same person posting under
> >> all three.
>
> > GIMMICK # 3 -- An obvious lie. Everyone knows they are three
> > different posters. Desmond just cannot 'handle the truth.'
>
> Of course, LDB and Rush 'Lapdog' Wickes are the only two here who believe
> that Don 'I-Ride-My-Wife's-Bike' Kool is not currently posting as billytwat
> and 'David_M...@subspacemail.com'. Thankfully, and in another
> 'own-goal', LDB has ensured that the 'Scum Doctrine' has now been invoked.
> The mere fact that he, abolitionist par excellence, has just said that they
> are different people, means that all of news:alt.activism.death-penalty is
> now convinced that they are not. Another one for the Light-Dwellers.
> Thanks, LDB. Still, let's not even _talk_ about LDB's constant use of
> 'everiwon [sic] knows ...' followed by another mendacious accusation of
> eating virgins.
>
You will note only 'mindless drivel' and meaningless insults. Like all
of desi's lies, they are presented without the slightest bit of proof. They
are the most disgusting insults imaginable to various members of this
group. Thus, I can guarantee you, Geena, that if you take a reasonable
stance as a retentionist, you will eventually be offered the same
'mindless drivel' and meaningless insults. It is the ONLY method
that desi knows.
> >> His posts always end with the word 'Rev.', but he is not a minister.
> >> He obtained his 'ordination' from an online website :
> >> http://www.ulc.org/ One of my cats also got 'ordained' from the same
> >> website, and there are some other posters here who became 'ministers'
> >> on the same website, to poke fun at this particular idiot. His real
> >> name is Donald McDonald (no, really, I'm not joking !), and he is a
> >> child abuser (his website used to boast about how he 'set' his Pit
> >> Bull Terrier to savage his daughter's face) and convicted felon.
>
> > GIMMICK # 3 -- More obvious lies. In fact, Desmond has
> > accused MANY of being pedophiles here,
>
> If the glove fits.
>
Huh???? You ignorant fuck. Nothing comes across more clear than
in your four words you have demonstrated that you are an ignorant fuck.
You're laughable ignorant. A racist, homophobic, pathetic, laughable,
ignorant fuck.
> > as he now accuses 'Donald McDonald.'
>
> There I thought I was accusing Drewl. Still, thanks for confirming that
> they're the same person.
>
The inoperative word is 'thought,' desi. It is not within your intellectual
repertoire. And I can only presume you are totally drunk at this moment.
> > Desmond presumes such insults provide an 'argument,' when
> > in fact they are part of the most obscene behavior demonstrated from any
> > poster here. He certainly does not have the slightest idea who I am,
> > yet he has called ME a pedophile on a number of occasions. Here
> > are six examples of his words directed to me on six separate occasions
> > in his posting history--
>
> Oh-oh ... are we about to see some more 'quotes' made by other's (sic) ..?
>
No... we're about to see YOUR quotes. And denying them is only
further proof of your lies. Since I was the one on the receiving end
of your sickening insults and well know they are your EXACT words.
> > 1) "It might have flown right over your pointy little
> > redneck head as said head was bobbing up and down over
> > Dwight-the-Altar-Boy-From-Tampa's crotch" See
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=diablo-7F7BB2.00235902032002%40newsroom.utas.edu.au&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
>
> Jesus, now I'm QZD !! Ha, ha, ha !!!
>
No, the words are yours. And denial only proves you are a liar.
> { snip remainder of URL's (sic) made by other's (sic) }
>
Can't handle it, eh?
> > So you decide for yourself if Desmond is possessed of a mind that is
> > not perverted. Why would he call ME... a handle that is totally unknown
> > to him... a pedophile ... unless he is at a loss for a rational response,
> > and must rely on the most perverted insults imaginable?
>
> Hey, like I say, Sergei, if the glove fits, right ?
>
Then clearly you should have no problem with my calling you a 'wife-beater'
and an angry, abusive drunk. Clearly, my recognition of your character
is much closer than your lies as to mine.
> > Further, he has also called many others homosexuals, including me,
> > believing that constitutes an 'insult' in HIS homophobic rage.
>
> Whereas being called 'gay' immediately gives rise to frantic,
> Bible-thumping denials, accompanied by ...
>
> 'Some of my best friend's [sic] are faggo ... er, I mean,
> gay's [sic] !!'
>
Wow... there is no doubt that you have a mental sickness. There is
apparently no bottom to your absolute depravity here.
> { snip }
>
> >> He also posted my late mother's address to this newsgroup, asking others
> >> to 'go pay her a visit'. If you run a quick search on google, you'll
> >> also find references to where he advised the mother of a handicapped
> >> child to 'just smother the little cunt', and where he advocated raping
> >> female abolitionists, so that 'the bitches know what it's like to be a
> >> victim'.
>
> > PV Writes -- GIMMICKS # 7 and # 10 -- GIMMICK # 7 demonstrates
> > that Desmond's own perverted character cannot be dismissed using
> > an 'example' of others. Looking at GIMMICK # 10, we find that
> > Desmond has demonstrated much perversion of his own.
>
> I'm going to choke with laughter ... 'Looking at GIMMICK # 10' ...
>
> ROTFLMAO !!!
>
> { snip }
>
> >> He has recently 'branched out' into posting a rote response to my
> >> articles, in the hope that I will be 'archived' in google, as I
> >> exercise my right under the French Constitution, to freedom of
> >> expression, and freedom to decide on the distribution of those words.
> >> A quick glance at these 'archives', will show that as many of them have
> >> been altered before being 'archived', they serve as much use as a
> >> safety match in the Antarctic.
>
> > PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- None of the words of Desmond have been altered.
>
> Alas, Geena, whilst LDB would claim that none of my words 'have' (sic) been
> altered, the fact is that the only archive which matters, is the one on my
> hard drive.
And God stamps "LOSER" on desi's forehead again.
Quite wrong, sport. The only archive that matters to YOU, might be that. But
all other comments, even those of some who have forged my handle
are subject to the 'eye of the beholder.' And when the posting HISTORY
is examined, that eye will decide for itself if you were the author. I
think you are AFRAID of that 'eye.' Desperately afraid. Now bang
your forehead against the desktop, and go into 'denial mode.'
> So whilst we know that LDB responds to roughly one post of
> mine, with one post of his, the 'dolly' archive can be taken as a
> _numerical_ indicator of how many posts I have made. Its textual content,
> however, has been called 'highly suspect' (NY Times, 01/10/02), and cannot
> be used as a reference.
>
Of course it can. All 'references' are subject to 'individual' interpretation
of their validity and accuracy. The fact is you are AFRAID that dolly
HAS kept accurate track of your posts. One can usually verify that
by comparing your posts that are still in the active newsgroup, with
how dolly has kept THEM accurate when archiving to google. If
there was any question as to THAT accuracy, you would be the FIRST
to point that out. But in fact, his archive is 'perfectly clear and true,'
and everyone knows it. So your denials are simply more horseshit.
> > It is quite easy for him to again lie in that respect, since we have no
> > benchmark to his words,
>
> ... therefore negating _any_ legitimacy that you might have in claiming
> 'none of the words of Desmond have [sic] been altered'. And yet again,
> LDB's dancing around on one foot ...
>
Actually all we've determined 'legitimately,' is that you lie. As often
as necessary.
> > since he does not archive them.
>
> Indeed I don't, and this decision is as much my right, as your right to
> post anonymously. _That_ is fact, whether you like it or not. The only
> archive that is 100% accurate, is the one on my machine. Now go on, FW ...
> whinge about how I wish to 'hide' my words ... whilst posting them to
> usenet ... ROTFLMAO !! Indeed, having been accused of being a troll, and
> trolls ... sorry, troll's (sic) by definition wish to be answered, thus we
> see that on the one hand, you believe that I want to be answered (thus
> placing my words in google), but that on the other, I wish to 'hide' those
> words ? Jesus, you really are as thick as shit, aren't you ? The 'cat'
> that can't decide which fly to chase ... and whose ... sorry, who's (sic)
> frustration is so immense, at not being able to get up one up on his
> Tormentor in Chief, that he'll contradict himself in the same post. LOL
> ... life is soooooo good !!
>
Whine... whine... whine... while dolly insures all those whines end up in
google. And whenever I wish, I will bring them back to life... and you
can again whine... whine... whine. But, in fact, no one will believe you.
Everyone here KNOWS that what dolly archives are YOUR words. Thus,
you are only left with whine...whine...whine.
> > There are many instances that he has DENIED saying those words, when it
> > is clear he had said them, since they were REMEMBERED by posters.
>
> ROTFLMAO !!! Like the eyewitnesses 'REMEMBERED' (sic) the guy who did 20
> years for a rape that he didn't commit ? LOL ... can this get any easier ?
>
Not quite the same, sport. And you know it.
> { snip }
>
> > PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 3 -- Why would I NOT deny a lie from Desmond?
>
> When it's not a lie ?
>
Hello... You claimed I had called 'all Germans stupid.' That is most
certainly a lie, since you cannot provide even one instance of my having
said that. It is typical of you, to 'quote' me, using lies. Which makes
those words become YOURS, since they are certainly not MY QUOTES.
Thus, it is YOU who called "ALL Germans stupid."
> Indeed, Geena, beware of he who posts with forked tongue, and who states
> that all Germans are stupid,
Lie... while I always provide PROOF (which you deny as being your
words - although everyone knows they are), you simply lie, and offer
NOTHING.
> and that he will never again trust 'those
> lying Palestinian bastards'.
Lie. Thus, it becomes YOUR words.
> The same poster who would call a German
> 'Adolph',
I did so to one PARTICULAR posters who took on a very distinct
resemblance. Later, I found other characteristics that caused me
grave doubts as to his anti-Semitic leanings.
> and who would then deny that this insult is based on the very
> fact that the person in question _is_ German.
I based it on the fact that his postings resembled comments we
might see from 'Adolph.'
> No more intelligent and
> sophisticated an insult, than calling all Germans 'Nazi cunt's [sic]' ...
A lie, of course, see
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+%22Nazi+cunt%27s%22+group:alt.activism.death-penalty+author:Planet&hl=
en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&scoring=d
I've never used that phrase, with or without the silly apostrophe. Thus
it again becomes desi's words, along with a bunch of others, that are
now HIS -- such as HIS words and will be brought back to demonstrate
that HE is the racist --
"crazed, stinking, neo-Nazi cunt"
"dumbfuck Nazi bastard"
"dumbfuck Nazi cunt"
None of them MINE... ALL of them now HIS.
> ah yes, he's been down that road, too. Did I say that he is an admitted
> racist ?
Actually, you are the one now out of the closet in respect to being a
racist.
> Do I need to point it out, bearing in mind his 'portfolio'
> above ? Indeed, like his 'idol', Jean-Marie le Pen, he is _proud_ of his
> racism.
You really think I care about le Pen. He only demonstrates the
thick vein of racism that runs through you.
> Proud ! We who consider a person on his merits first, and who
> give no thought to the colour of his skin, what does LDB call us ? 'Evil'.
> The true 'mettle' of this poster, is becoming more and more obvious with
> each post, and I am delighted that his hatred of all that walks in the
> daytime, was not able to suppressed for his post. That was a fear of mine,
> that as you're a new poster, he would use the 'Saruman' voice, the sweet,
> melodious, sugar-coated 'reasonable poster' voice. Alas for him, he was
> unable to do so, and is now exposed for all to see as the craven-voiced,
> shrieking, screaming bigot that the rest of AADP has come to abhor over the
> past two years.
>
desi... now reduced to 'wildman soap-box ravings.'
> > Am I supposed to permit him to lie? In fact, I have called one particular
> > German poster here 'stupid.' NEVER all Germans. Quite the opposite, I
> > have recognized that Germans are far from 'stupid.' And have been
> > a significant contributor to the advance of our species. But there IS
> > one particular German poster here, who has certainly demonstrated
> > an inability to grasp some rather fundamental principles and continues
> > to rely on 'emotion' as the focus of his opposition to the DP. And in
> > my opinion, my comment was well justified, since he also demonstrated
> > some latent anti-Semitic postings... claiming that the U.S. should add
> > a 'star' (think of the MEANING of such a word to a German and a Jew), to
> > the U.S. 'Banner,' calling ISRAEL the 53rd U.S. State. See
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=aljs8t%24vom%2405%241%40news.t-online.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
> > Desmond is, of course, an equal opportunity bigot. He is a racist, a
> > bigot, an anti-Jewish, and an anti-Arab poster. Some of his racist words..
> > his EXACT words were -
>
> Once again, I can only imagine that what the Dallas Morning News referred
> to as, 'This spastic's ignorance of all literature', is preventing him from
> understanding satire. Are we to assume that Shakespeare was racist ? Must
> we conclude that Baudelaire was sexist ? The fine line between usenet and
> real life, never was easy for LDB to grasp, as evinced by his recent call
> for other posters to 'murder desi [sic]'. Now we see that the even finer
> line between poetic fiction and real life, is causing him the same
> problems. The Rev toutou will pray for him.
>
There you have it, folks... desi now enters end-stage dementia and sees
himself as Shakespeare and Baudelaire. When in fact he is simply a
run-of-the-mill, rather ignorant, racist. The only 'fine line' that desi
challenges is that between sanity and insanity. Since I have never
called for anyone to 'murder desi.' Although I do admit that I cannot
imagine the thought has not dominated the mind of his wife. While
desi has certainly called for the 'destruction' of EVERY retentionist,
in a purge of life resembling the Inquisition, with desi as Peter II of
Aragon, demanding death by fire for all 'heretics' to his 'gospel' of
abolition. In fact, that rather fits desi. Of course, we can find him
now feverishly scrambling to find out 'who' was Peter II of Aragon.
And presumably when he does, he will either claim I 'found it on
the net,' or I am being 'pseudo-intellectual.'
> { snip more of the same ... }
>
> >> He claims not to care about the opinions of others
> >> on the newsgroup, but
> >> will frequently launch into an incandescent rage when others here refuse
> >> to condemn 'evil desi' (if you want to see an example of this, look at
> >> the headers of this article, and click on the 'Obsessive Litany' link).
> >> He sees me everywhere, and indeed if you cross him, he will claim that I
> >> am you, posting under an alias. No doubt I'm 'Arnold' from Marseille,
> >> too. I'm in fact dirt, John Rennie, Richard Jackson, and Jigsaw rolled
> >> into one. Christ, I'm the whole fucking newsgroup.
>
> > PV Writes -- GIMMICK # 8 -- 'mindless drivel.' I've claimed none of those
> > things.
>
> More lies, linked in with a 'GIMMICK' (sic) gimmick. LDB believes that I
> am 'xganon' ... 'John Rennie', and 'Don Kool'. Indeed, he recently
> speculated on whether he and I might be the only two posters ... sorry,
> 'poster's' (sic) on news:alt.activism.death-penalty. Scary ...
>
Yep... it's now clear that desi is 'off his trolley.'
> { snip more racist comments from LDB }
>
> I'm gratified, Geena, that LDB chose to answer thus. As I stated above, my
> big fear was that his recent holiday in 'Newfound' would have left him with
> sunstroke, and unable to expose the pure venom that he regularly infects
> the newsgroup with (jump, LDB !!). Happily, this has not been the case,
> and we have seen how he makes grammatical cock-up after grammatical
> cock-up, waiting for a few weeks, and then presenting it with a 'sic' in
> his posts, to make other's (sic) believe that it is not _his_ fuck-up. How
> else can the man who thinks that 'would' is spelled 'wood' manage to be
> reviled by so many ? Not for nothing is his 'handle' (sic) one that
> guarantees anonymity, for having been ostracised by every 'friend' he has
> ever known, since leaving school in Russia, he knows that no one 'wood'
> (sic) take him seriously here. Too bad for him that I came back to the
> newsgroup, and stopped his grammar flames, which in themselves contained
> grammar cock-ups (see another post by St George). Too bad for him that
> someone is there to remind the group that the 'highest' level of literacy
> that he has reached, contains gems like ...
>
> 'Poor little Matthew...
> dropped...shaken...banged...smacked...thumped...
> hammered...punched...whacked...pounded...slapped...cuffed...
> walloped...socked...thrown....bopped...hurled...chucked....slung....
> smashed..pummeled...beaten...spanked...whipped...tossed...battered...
> belted,,,struck...clobbered...bounced...and dribbled...lies dead in his
> grave...'
>
That's certainly what ol' Louise was convicted of. Of course, you care
NOTHING about the baby... after all 'he is DEAD.' and cannot be honored.
It's ALL ABOUT the murderer to you. The victim has no place in the
equation. And 'the doctrine of punishment for murderers' is totally alien
to to you as a 'tool of murder prevention.'
> ... or ...
>
> 'cuckoo...cuckoo...cuckoo...
> In love with the 'Great White Whale'
> cuckoo...cuckoo...cuckoo...
> In love with the 'Great White Whale'
> cuckoo...cuckoo...cuckoo...
> In love with the 'Great White Whale'
> cuckoo...cuckoo...cuckoo...
> In love with the 'Great White Whale'
> cuckoo...cuckoo...cuckoo...
> In love with the 'Great White Whale'
>
> ... or even ...
>
> 'Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
> Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
> Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
> Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
> Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
> Nam-myoho-renge-kyo
>
Without a doubt... desi has been 'sipping on the gin,' as he wrote this
post... and it caught up with him at the end. He's positively drooling.
>
> Truly, AADP is dealing with a man of towering stupidity, the Master of
> Proactive Stupidity, and someone whom the BBC recently referred to 'that
> fucking dimwitted spastic', and that another deathie here referred to as
> 'the one with the social maturity of a 12-year-old girl'.
>
> Like I say, Geena ... enjoy your stay.
>
> [1]
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=wife+group:alt.activism.death-penalty+author:Rennie&start=10&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&se
lm=Jbo69.1538%240U4.32533%40newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net&rnum=12
>
Of course we have prior to that, desi's many claims that I am a
pedophile, which he 'claims' were made by other's (sic). Which simply
shows that 'desi lies.' And in the end... the only fault greater than his
lies is the 'method' he resorts to hide those lies. Once again HIS words
to ME... no mistaking it.
1) "It might have flown right over your pointy little
redneck head as said head was bobbing up and down over
Dwight-the-Altar-Boy-From-Tampa's crotch" See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=diablo-7F7BB2.00235902032002%40newsroom.utas.edu.au&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
2) "altar-boy shagging Bible-basher" See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=L7Po8.12823%24K52.2085263%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
3) "altar-boy shagging prick"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=DUTo8.16901%24K52.2590863%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
4) "a bigoted old altar-boy-shagger"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=0Dbg8.11590%24j93.3613806%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
5) "you altar-boy-molesting dipshit."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=FlVf8.13270%24TV4.1933557%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
6) "Dwight the altar-boy from Wisconsin (or was he from
Tampa ? Can't remember. So many young boys, so
little time, eh, Jed ?) "
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=5qzg8.20855%24j93.5666102%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
He also clipped out the part of his making a fool of himself in
respect to Judge Zobel, and his obvious racist statements of
1) In describing his idea of a 'typical' robber, somehow it always
ends up to be a Black. His words in describing the words of someone
intent on robbery -- "Gimmie da money, honkey mothafucka, oh ah toast
yo ass !!"
2) And in another post, almost the same -- "'Gimme da dough,
mothafucka o ah toast yo ass !!'"
3) Calling others -- "smelly 'Jigaboo' Ausländer."
4) Posting to me -- "I even 'tweaked' your nose a few days back, by using the
word 'jigaboo'" Presuming he insults ME, rather than an entire race.
5) And again to me "same bestial beating administered to LDB's [That
refers to me] now almost 'jigaboo' buttocks"
6) And again -- "Paris is an oasis of safety, be you jigaboo (ho, ho, ho ...) or not."
7)And again to me -- ":Say, LDB [that refers to me] ... how come your "ass" [sic] is so
jigaboo these days ?' ... "
8) And again "France (the Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth, BTW) did
not 'lose' the match against those jigaboo (*snigger*) upstarts, QZD."
9) And most recently --- "I cream in my pants when they execute a dumbfuck
nigga fry black fucker,"
And less you believe he is not bigoted against others Europeans as
well --
10) "it was German beer ... now, if only I could get the smell of sausage
out of the bloody bottles"
11) "Indeed, perhaps if the floods that are presently threatening Germany,
had been controlled before they swept across into Europe, from the Czech
Republic and Poland, then this fair continent would have been saved the
same fate as the smelly 'auslanders'."
And has, of course, simply added a few more racist comments in this
post. His denials are as empty as his head, where as we read his words
we can hear Colonel Bogey's March whistling through his two ears and
the empty space in-between.
PV
> --
> Ayatollah Desmond Coughlan |Superlunary and Most Exalted
|Spiritual Leader of the Universal
|Right to Life Church. (umm... get
|away from me -- you filthy black
|starving child in Africa) 'My church'
|isn't for you.
dirtdog
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
<1296 fucking lines of _obsessed_ ranting by PV snipped unread>
FUCK ME!!!!!
This ascii post has actually consumed more bandwidth than an average
pornographic jpeg. Is this some sort of a record?
w00f
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:02:58 +0000
>
>le Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:08:08 +0000, dans l'article
><59mftu40o6so6e6uf...@4ax.com>, dirtdog
><dirtdog...@fruffrant.com> a dit ...
>
>> <1296 fucking lines of _obsessed_ ranting by PV snipped unread>
>>
>> FUCK ME!!!!!
>>
>> This ascii post has actually consumed more bandwidth than an average
>> pornographic jpeg. Is this some sort of a record?
>
>Well it's certainly every bit as 'obscene'. My newsreader tags it as a tad
>over 63 kB.
>
>However, what's really important is your observation that it is 'unread'.
>I shall be _very_ surprised if anyone reads it. LDB hasn't yet realised
>that compactness is a virtue, and continues to wrap up his empty, online
>'farts' in as much verbiage as possible, in an attempt to appear 'araldite'
>(sic). Whereas my carefully controlled 325 and 779-line posts ... sorry,
>'post's' (sic) were about the most severe and brutal savagings ... sorry,
>'savaging's' (sic) that he's yet had to endure.
>
>He's obsessed. We shouldn't be mocking the afflicted.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!n
ews.dfci.harvard.edu!news.harvard.edu!iad-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.n
et!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:02:58 +0000
>Lines: 27
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <ikl8ra...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><npv5ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><WRGB9.301346$S8.61...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><59mftu40o6so6e6uf...@4ax.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037556450 16472932 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-No-Archive: true
>Mail-Copies-To: never
>X-Obsessive-Litany: http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>X-Chats: http://www.zeouane.org/chats/
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3F1F C838 88D5 2659 B00A 6DF6 6883 FB9C E34A AC93
>User-Agent: tin/1.5.14-20020926 ("Soil") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.5-RELEASE (i386))
>
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
A Planet Visitor
"dirtdog" <dirtdog...@fruffrant.com> wrote in message news:59mftu40o6so6e6uf...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 06:40:54 GMT, "A Planet Visitor"
> <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
>
> FUCK ME!!!!!
>
> This ascii post has actually consumed more bandwidth than an average
> pornographic jpeg. Is this some sort of a record?
>
posing as posts, Louise.
PV
>
> w00f
>
>
>
>
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:ikl8ra...@lievre.voute.net...
> le Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:08:08 +0000, dans l'article <59mftu40o6so6e6uf...@4ax.com>, dirtdog
<dirtdog...@fruffrant.com> a dit ...
>
> >
> > FUCK ME!!!!!
> >
> > This ascii post has actually consumed more bandwidth than an average
> > pornographic jpeg. Is this some sort of a record?
>
> over 63 kB.
>
> However, what's really important is your observation that it is 'unread'.
> I shall be _very_ surprised if anyone reads it. LDB hasn't yet realised
> that compactness is a virtue, and continues to wrap up his empty, online
> 'farts' in as much verbiage as possible,
<clipped mindless drivel>
In respect to the length of my post, you are probably quite right. Although
it took some 'explanation' in the way of proof of what I said, it could have
been drastically shortened to simply --
desi is a LIAR. The most important proven point
desi is perverse
desi is a racist
desi is anti-American
desi is anti-Semitic
desi is a bigot
desi is homophobic
desi is a hypocrite
desi is obsessively pedantic
desi is egocentrically in love with himself
desi is a cry-baby and incessantly whines in self-pity
desi has an unhealthy appetite for very, very young females
desi is morbidly obsessed with dead and decayed bodies
desi suffers from eisoptrophobia
desi is a 'pseudo-intellectual'
desi dances an Irish jig, and *giggles* at every tragedy
desi calls murderers 'victims'
desi calls victims 'murderers'
desi does not understand the language of logic
desi does not understand the language of mathematics
desi is totally at a loss in things of a geopolitical nature
desi speaks almost exclusively 'mindless drivel'
desi often <clip>s everything, provides an insult and claims victory
desi believes insults are offered in 'good faith'
desi believes when he is proven wrong, no apology is necessary
desi uses an appeal to 'God and religion' in his 'gospel' of abolition
desi exhorts his 'followers' in a pseudo-religious appeal to 'destroy'
all retentionists
desi admits he engages in abuse of posters here
desi engages in the same methods that he accuses of others
desi offers to 'gamble' on the lives of possible murder victims
desi deceptively hides his posting history and denies much of
his postings
desi creates certain 'pleasing views' of himself which are obviously untrue
desi believes 'his' morals are 'THE' morals in some delusion that
he represents a DEITY who defines morals for the rest of our species
desi drinks more than is good for him
desi is angry and cruel when he drinks
desi is angry and cruel when he doesn't drink
desi has no principles
desi has no integrity
desi has no ethics
desi has no honor
desi has no shame
desi has no dignity
desi is a bubblehead
It is therefore true, that much bandwidth could have been saved by simply
encapsulating the truth about 'desi.' But where would the 'fun' have
gone? ho ho ho.
<pathetic cry-baby whine clipped>
PV
> --
JIGSAW1695
Message-id: <ar0ka4$vuv$03$1...@news.t-online.com>
<....>
===============================
Jurgen, we often ask the same questons:
"what are you doing her?" You contribute nothing relevent to the news group.
isnt it time that you returned to your rightful NG, "Alt. Hitlerlives.com??"
Jürgen
JIGSAW1695
>Message-id: <argd56$vps$00$1...@news.t-online.com>
>
>I love her, of course.
Good reply. Let me try it again.
"Jurgen, we often ask the same question.
What are you doing here??"
Jürgen
JIGSAW1695 schrieb in Nachricht
<20021120171243...@mb-ci.aol.com>...
I am trying to explore whether the proponents of a sadist penalty are
thoroughly sadists themselves or whether there could be help.
Happy to have cleared things up for you
J.
dirtdog
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
And to think this fucker nearly slipped by me....
<snipped>
>ROTFLMAO.. in 'real life' you would be prosecuted for the most
>libelous statements possible, regarding lies about someone having
>been convicted of a crime. The penalties for your crime, in such
>lies, would be substantial.
ROTFLMAO indeed!
You were recently spanked by Desmond (and laughed at heartily by the
rest of the group) vis a vis you claim that OJ Simpson was found
guilty of murder in a civil court. Obviously, you were embarrassed,
but claimed, in your usual bullshitting fashion that 'of course I know
the difference between civil and criminal liability'. Your entire
frantic, feeble effort to lie your way out of ridicule, FW, was to
claim that you had never used the word 'convicted'.
Well explain _this bastard_. A 'prosecution for libel'!
My fucking god you're thick.
<tedious rant snipped>
w00f
William Robert
Louise, need I remind you what happens when you try to play lawyer. This is
something that is best left to a trained professional.
William Robert
-----------
God bless America!
-----------
dirtdog
Robert) wrote:
<snipped yet another hiding of FW>
>Louise, need I remind you what happens when you try to play lawyer. This is
>something that is best left to a trained professional.
>
>William Robert
>
Wrong account, PV... You'll need to switch again before you do your
'Dr Dolly' posts, sorry, post's.
LOL!
w00f
dirtdog
<dirtdogDONKOOLRI...@fruffrant.com> wrote:
<vicious arse-fucking of PV snipped>
All gone quiet, FW....
w00f
A Planet Visitor
"dirtdog" <dirtdogDONKOOLRI...@fruffrant.com> wrote in message
news:hb7utu8pmphumt1gl...@4ax.com...
enemy who posts under a hundred handles. When in fact you
have a hundred enemies who each post under one handle. Just
as desi does. You're pathetic... and a bit pathological as well.
LOUISE.
> w00f
>
>
dirtdog
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
<snipped>
> you
>have a hundred enemies who each post under one handle.
A hundred? Really?
That wouldn't be a lie, would it?
<snipped more of PV digging a hole for himself>
w00f
A Planet Visitor
particular ravings among the plethora of 57KB of mindless ravings.
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:rg0nra...@lievre.voute.net...
There are 'successes' in usenet, Geena, and there are spectacular
successes. My participation in this thread is in the latter category.
TRANSLATION -- "Like an orgasm, I've heard of 'successes,' but I've never
experienced one."
One need only consider this week's statistics, posted today (I say 'today',
as I'm starting to write this on Sunday afternoon ... I may not finish the
entire post today) by my server, and which reveal that LDB made 103 posts
this week, compared to my 220. Yet when it comes to bandwidth, LDB, with
less than half the number of posts, has in fact almost the same amount of
bandwidth (497 kB as opposed to 502 kB).
What does that tell you, Genna? It says that my 103 posts contain
INFORMATION. While his 220 posts are generally one or two
lines of 'mindless drivel.' That's why I'm keeping track of them. Since
26 Oct, less than a month, over 400 posts from desi containing
NOTHING but 'mindless drivel.' See my daily accumulations of that
drivel in "Desi 'mindless drivel'"
le Sun, 17 Nov 2002 06:40:54 GMT, dans l'article <WRGB9.301346$S8.61...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
> Kudos to desi... there are very few people in the world who can
> whine from one side of their mouth, and lie from the other.
> It's all ranting and raving in your racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American
> drivel.
And there it is again. The master of Proactive Stupidity. Of course, I
have never made a racist comment on this group. I have never made an
anti-Semitic comment on this group. I have never made an anti-American
comment on this group. On the other hand, LDB is on record (in google) of
calling all Germans 'dumbfuck Nazi cunt's' (sic), and Palestinians,
'untrustworthy, stonethrowing spastic's' (sic). LDB's shrink calls it
'transference', and whilst I'm not one to come between him and his
therapist, I'd just like to point out that the latter is correct, when he
tells him, 'L ... he's taking the piss, man !!'
And there it is again... the 'mindless drivel' presented as lies, and totally
without substance, while my previous post contained SPECIFIC
references to desi's racism. And the part I clipped was his accusing
me of insults, and look what we find from desi. I find nothing there
BUT insults. And of course, the common lie that desi perpetrates
by claiming I've said what I have not said or even implied.
> Which expresses 'true love' for murderers (who you call 'victims'
> and refer to the real victims as responsible for being murdered),
And yet another blatant fabrication.
Pardon me? You're claiming that you haven't called murderers
'victims'??? And seriously implied (as in the case of bobbyc)
that the victim was 'responsible' for being murdered. Just say
it, desi... you love murderers, and have clearly expressed love
and prayers for them. Even if it means freeing them outright or
praying for them to escape to Mexico.
> and Elmer Gantry religious ravings, demanding that others pick
> up the flag of your crusade, and wipe retentionists from the face
> of the earth. I believe we went through such a period before. It
> was called the Inquisition, and led by those who think just as you
> do.
I am sure, Geena that you are wondering, as am I, if the above was written
by a human being, or by a chimp high on LSD. Perhaps some forward-thinking
abolitionists locked the proverbial chimp in a room with a typewriter, 25
years ago, and we are only now seeing the result.
See that, Geena? See anything but raging insults? Clearly, desi
is a man who claims that _I_ use 'religion' to express retention,
yet I have never done so, nor do I believe it plays any part in the
DP. While he claims to not have a 'religion,' but it clearly is part
and parcel of his 'gospel' of abolition. And his words often imply
the burning of retentionists at the stake... speaking 'pejoratively,'
of course.
> Again, you have this inability to 'look in the mirror,' since I am not entreating
> God to 'punish' those who disagree with my agenda. It's you who
> presumes 'God is on my side.' God is actually on no one's side.
All of news:alt.activism.death-penalty can see the blazing crucifix that
LDB holds up, as he bellows his indignation that we in
news:alt.activism.death-penalty have had sex before marriage. Hmm ... come
to think of it. LDB hasn't sex _within_ marriage for nigh on twenty years.
Maybe that's where the bitterness comes from.
See any sense whatsoever in that comment, Geena? He somehow
extracts a 'blazing crucifix' from 'God is on no one's side.' It's simply
part of his inability to parse the English language. And we know
he CAN do it... so it just becomes a rather transparent lie. A sad
affliction. And noteworthy that he almost always subconsciously
applies some sexual input into his 'mindless drivel.' The
man is obsessed with the sex life of others, in some deviant
voyeur behavior.
<clipped outrageous lies in respect to Theodore Frank where I have
already proved that desi stated he would 'gamble' the lives of
innocents in freeing Frank, rather than execute him.>
'"I would like to stand at the place and kill the Jew, who stands
opposite me. If each Arab kills one Jew, then no more Jews will be
left."' [2]
Note the 'quotes' (sic). The intention was clear: to suggest that I had
posted those words, when in fact, I had done no such thing.
What a crock of shit -- the post is
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=ubLv9.79685%24r7.1593261%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
And my comment was in reference to the three most disgusting
comments ever seen on Usenet, posted by desi in reference to all
retentionists that I have noted here before. In reference to DESI'S
words I remarked
"These words were not the one-line insults provided by Don Kool, but a
clearly orchestrated, in-depth hateful attack, no different from the
words of a Muslim zealot who would say --
"I would like to stand at the place and kill the Jew, who stands opposite
me. If each Arab kills one Jew, then no more Jews will be left."
It was not a quote of desi's words, but a quote of what a Muslim zealot
HAS said --- Mustafa Tlas, The Syrian Secretary of Defense, on Lebanese
television LBC 6 May 2001. And I see no DIFFERENCE in desi's
bigoted comments toward retentionists then what I see in the words
of Mustafa Tlas. desi is HIS mirror image... and desi's words mirror
Mustafa's words in the hatred expressed in those words. If desi cannot
handle that comparison, then perhaps he should reexamine HIS
words.
You'll find
that this 'misrepresentation' and this 'quoting out of context' is what LDB
does best. We shall see some more examples of this later on, in the 'Sarah
Hughes' and 'Tiffany Jones' cases. For now, let's snip some more
barefaced lies ...
Actually, Geena, you have only to look at the references I provided for
DESI'S words, and decide for yourself. I find them unhealthy and sexist.
{ snip }
Of course, as the only posts by me that appear in google, are those that I
permit to appear, the above claim by LDB is just more 'confetti'.
Do you see that? An admission that he can tell lies, and then
deny them as he does not permit them to be remembered. I
think France had a President who did the same thing in the past.
Accountability is not desi's strong suit.
>> Like accusing me of claiming that
>> all Arabs are 'ragheads', or that all Germans smell of 'sausage', taking
>> out of context satirical comments in another thread.
<denial of saying what he has clearly said clipped>
You look at the links, Geena, and decide for yourself. And understand
that you will NEVER find my use of the word 'raghead' except to
repeat desi's use of it, and to quote it accurately and within quotes.
NEVER. In fact, one very clear example of HIS use, which is
not enclosed in any sort of quotes, or seems to be anything but
his opinion is --
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=nCdj9.14321%24yB5.443218%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
Take a look. You will find that I have never used that word, other
than quoting desi's use of it. And always assuring it is clearly
recognized as HIS.
In fact, if you run a search on google for the word 'raghead', and exclude
the posts made by LDB, and the ones in which I call him on his use of this
disgusting term, you will note that _no one_ else has mentioned it.
You will find under dolly that desi has always CLAIMED that I used it,
and I never have. That is how the word FIRST came about... with
desi CLAIMING I had used it... thus the word BELONGS to desi, not
me. As I said, I've only posted the quotes of DESI using it.
> Actually, your word was 'gamble.'
OK, the count is now '1 true statement'. How curious, however, that just a
few lines up there ^^^^ LDB was claiming that I had stated that there was
no chance that Theodore Frank would murder again,
That is not true, of course, and you should examine the reference that
desi provides. I used that as an example of a statement which must
be proven, before it is true. This was because of desi claiming that
it was not necessary for abolitionists to 'prove' the DP does not deter.
It was in regards to his 'argument' that because retentionists cannot
prove the DP does deter, then it constitutes proof that it does not. You
need to read the post, to see again how desi distorts the meaning. As
I did not state that desi HAD said that phrase, it was an - IF you make
the statement 'Theodore Frank would NOT have murdered again if set
free,' and you are unable to PROVE it, it does NOT prove the contrary
statement that 'Theodore Frank would murder again.'
and now here he is,
claiming that I admit that there is a possibility he would have.
I've always claimed, and desi has agreed, that he would 'gamble'
innocent lives in freeing Theodore Frank. In effect, not actually
CARING about those lives, as long as Frank is not executed.
I _did_ use the word 'gamble', but also pointed out the caveat that the
chances of him murdering were infinitesimally small. Indeed, the chances
of _me_ murdering someone, are greater than the chances that Theodore
Frank would have done so.
ROTFLMAO... That's the most absurd statement possible. If
the general population, never previously convicted of murder, murdered
at the same rate as those who previously committed homicide we
would have a murder rate in the millions, at a population of 280
million. Even by the most conservative of recidivist rates for those
who have already murdered, of 1%, we would have 2.8 million
murders. In 25 years we have had about 300,000 homicides.
You do the math. Truly, if every person walking the streets was a
Theodore Frank, we would not be able to function as a society.
And desi knows that, but is simply lying again. And as usual, is
mathematics-challenged. What desi is trying to say is that there
are more first-time murders than recidivist murders in NUMBERS
rather than 'rates.' Which is quite normal considering the
different numbers of the members of each set (those who have not
committed murder v. those who have already committed murder).
And we are speaking of Theodore Frank. Who desi now
sees as apparently BETTER than he is. Well... go figure.
> I'll not apologize for that any further. JPB did not 'call' Judge
> Zobel a crook in so many words.
You lying fruitcake. He didn't accuse Judge Zobel of being a crook,
_period_. It's been said, but bears repeating ...
Apparently desi now addresses me directly, rather than Genna --
Ah... desi... you are the fruitcake. And the bubblehead. You
can have FW, but don't try to claim that I am what you know you
are. You claim JPB could defend your words of insult to Arabs,
calling it a 'pejorative.' Which is actually an admission that I
had not used that word. Thus, I am now able to claim that JPB
calling Judge Zobel a crook could also be a 'pejorative.' After all,
it is simply a matter of personal choice, since JPB HAD said
that Judge Zobel KNOWS that Woodward was not guilty, he HAD
the power to overturn a guilty verdict completely (which made you
look like a fool), yet the judge did not do so. That sounds like
a 'crooked' judge to me. So I was only speaking as a 'pejorative.'
'PV is again, because he lacks the ability to engage in real
debate, telling lies'.
No, no Genna... desi can't cover up HIS lies by simply claiming
that I lie. He's tried that with racism, homophobia, and his
anti-Arab statements. It won't fly any longer, if you examine his
words. It is a very simple 3 step process.
Step 1) Desi lies
Step 2) I quote his lies
Step 3) Jump to Step 1)
{ snip }
> What is truly dishonest, is what you did in respect to your
> insults provided to me, when you were totally wrong about
> what Judge Zobel has the power to do, and failed to apologize
> for those insults. Claiming insults can be given in 'good faith.'
Only yesterday, you were claiming that I had said, 'lies are OK, if they're
made in good faith'. Now it's 'insults' ? What will it be tomorrow ? If
you're going to be a fuckwitted, semi-literate twat, LDB, try to be a
consistent one.
Again, addressing me as I addressed him --
Umm... Certainly you BOTH lied and insulted. And you claimed
that no apology was necessary for your words which WERE both
lies and insults, because you contended they were made in
'good faith.' Which itself is a lie, since there was no 'good
faith' contained in your disgusting comments, which proved to
be totally false (lies) and insults. They were vile, and disgusting
insults containing not a grain of truth. And you now know it,
but you DEMANDED that it be accepted as TRUTH... OVER
and OVER and OVER... until you looked like an utter fool when
your balloon burst. Which makes you a liar, by admission.
{ snip some more }
>> ' his lust for 14-year-old nymphets'
>> ...
>> '"send that 16-year-old niece of yours"'
>>
>> *guffaw!*
>
> *guffaw*??? More of your 'articulate' arguments, desi???
> But there is no doubt that 'Old enough to bleed... old enough to butcher,'
> is your 'motto,' you pervert. There have been too many instances in the
> past, and many, not just me, have recognized your unhealthy appetite
> for very young teenage girls. Such as lusting after the 'firm, comely,
> sixteen-year-old thighs' of Sarah Hughes after watching her win the ice
> skating championships. And the 'victim' of your imaginary murder, who
> just ALSO happened to be a young female teenager. Imagine that... what
> a coincidence. Obsession perhaps?
Most of LDB's lies are as subtle as a brick in the face, Geena. This one,
however, is quite subtle. A 'quality lie', you might call it. Well, then
again, he _has_ had a lot of practice in getting his lies 'just right'.
When he says, 'very young teenage girls', the unspoken insinuation is that
of paedophilia.
Nah, actually it's just seen as unhealthy to any normal person. I
would think that you'd think, Genna, that there is something
wrong with this situation. Why would a 33 year old man lust
after 15 and 16-year old girls, if not at the edge of seeking them
even younger? I can see a teenage boy chasing girls that
young... but desi?? And why is it that desi does so at EVERY
opportunity? What drives his sexist nature, that seeks out
potential nymphets? I would have thought he'd have outgrown
this urge.
He doesn't say it, because to say it, would ensure that at
some point down the line, others would be able to point out that he had
accused a married man whose wife is three weeks from giving birth to their
first child, of being a 'paedophile'
Actually, the only one who has been CALLED a pedophile here,
has been me... called such by desi, in both a half-dozen separate
posts and a disgusting visual picture that he linked to the group
before.
However, let's have a look at the above insinuation. The post to which he
refers, when mentioning Sarah Hughes, is this one ...
'Following a link from the Noraid site, after having replied to Mark a
few minutes ago, I came across (not literally (more's the pity), of
course) the article on Sarah Hughes, and her gold medal in Salt Lake
City, on the NRA website. Tearing my eyes away from her firm, comely,
sixteen-year-old thighs, I looked a couple of paragraphs up the page,
and saw this ...'
That post was made on Saturday 23 February 2002, and carries the Message-ID
<slrna7e5rl.pv.p...@tortue.voute.net>.
Now, in my country, a sixteen-year-old girl is not a 'child'. In France,
girls reach majority at fifteen. So quite patently, LDB's insinuation of
'paedophilia' can only be described as 'grotesque' ... but then again, what
has he ever posted that _wasn't_ ?
I believe, Genna, that it remains grotesque... unhealthy, and a
bit sick for a 33-year-old to literally LUST in PUBLIC, and offer
his pitiful whining over the 'firm, comely, sixteen-year old thighs.'
What's the matter with him? Doesn't he realize that could conceivably
be his own daughter? If he were a teenager, it could be understood.
But when does he expect to GROW UP? And doesn't that show
how little respect he has for the opposite gender?
Another post to which he often refers, is this one ...
'Oh, all right, Jigsaw; you can come out. But it'll cost you ! You
have to take out a lifetime membership of Amnesty International,
promise to vote Democrat, and send that 16-year-old niece of yours
around to give me a blowjob whenever I want one.'
That one was made Friday 11 January 2002, and the Message-ID is
<slrna3ugcu.8n.p...@tortue.voute.net>.
Now, once again, we're talking about sixteen-year-old girls.
To desi --- Oh... sorry... that makes everything okay. You shithead.
In short, LDB's reference to 'his lust for 14-year-old nymphets' is quite
simply, a lie, designed to mislead the newsgroup. Fortunately for the
newsgroup, I am here as the 'shield' of Right, to deflect his venom, and
send it back down into the pit.
Ah... the LUST is there.. quite clearly. He just tries to 'justify'
his unhealthy appetite for nymphets by hiding behind the laws
which permit sexual relations at 15 in France. That doesn't make him
not lust after nymphets, it just provides the shield he'd hope to
hide behind.
>> Whilst I am flattered that you wish to let Geena see my fabulous work of
>> fiction, she will (I am sure) note that the Message-ID of the post in this
>> URL, is 20020817212931...@mb-fo.aol.com. As I do not post from
>> AOL, once again a 'splat!' is heard, and the yolk of a rotten egg goes down
>> your chin. LOL ... this is _wonderful_ !!
> Confession is good for the 'soul,' desi. You really should try to admit
> your own words, and not hide behind lies. After all, what ARE YOU,
> if you cannot defend your own words, and need to hide behind lies
> which deny those words as your own? Ooopss... why that makes
> you a liar... gee... we already knew that.
There we have him 'stamping his feet' again. Did you know that he uses the
words 'liar' and 'lie' 81 times in this post alone ? Perhaps he's going
for 'gold', in making 10,000 claims that everyone around him is 'lying'.
Who knows ? Who cares ? He's a joke. A sick joke, but a joke
nonetheless.
Once again, Geena... notice the lack of substance and the total
content of nothing but 'mindless drivel.'
>> In fact, Geena, the Message-ID of my little 'short story', concerning the
>> immense cruelty of the death penalty, and of how it is not only _as bad as_
>> murder, but _worse_, is ...
>>
>> slrnalt3ds.al9.pasde...@lievre.voute.net
>>
>> As you will see, LDB did _not_ post _my_ article, but a response to it.
>> LOL ... then he'll wonder why we all laugh at him. ROTFLMAO !
> That is because he hides his posting history from google, Geena. And we
> all know the reason for that. Nonetheless, his words are in the google
> reference I provided, if he wishes to 'deny' any specific word which
> appears in that URL, he should address what he wishes to deny, because
> regardless of his laughable denials, they are HIS words.
Again, Geena, we must gently point out to LDB that _quoted_ posts are not
'original posts'. Or 'post's' (sic) as he would call them.
You need to judge for yourself, Geena. Given the fact that desi
is a consumate liar when it comes to denying his posting history.
Given the fact that desi DOES hide his posts from google. And
given the fact that I don't think desi is coming right out and denying
he did not post that sickening description, you gain some insight
into the dementia that drives desi.
... bwaaahahahahahaaaa !!!!
> bwaaahahahahahaaaa !!!!???? More of your 'articulate' arguments, desi???
If you're a newcomer to news:alt.activism.death-penalty, or to usenet in
general, Geena, remember that usenet is a text-only medium. To get around
this, veteran posters such as myself, have developed 'shorthand' to express
laughter, sadness, amusement, and so on. These are every bit as valid on
usenet as 'LOL', or 'LMAO', or 'ROTFLMAO', or even the smiley. So we have
*chuckle*, *cackle*, 'giggle*, and the 'shorthand' for hysterical laughter,
which is 'Bwaaaahahahahaahaha'. Feel free to use them. Believe me, if you
make a habit of reading ol' Angel Gabriel's posts, you'll need them.
Only if you are as inarticulate as desi, will you need to rely on
such mindless drivel, expecting it to pose as reasonable commentary.
{ snip }
You think that logic is 'a language', so how are we expected to believe
that you know what you're talking about, when numbers are involved ?
Especially since you're on record as stating that you can't count over
two.
Again desi is addressing me --
No... actually I KNOW that logic is a language. You are perhaps
the only person in the world who would argue that it is not. Every
scholar and scientist recognizes that Logic is a primary
language, which finds a syntax based on truth tables, that
leave no space for individual interpretation. It is a language
which permits no structured nonsense. Which is why you
find it impossible to understand or use. Because all your
commentaries are simply structured nonsense.
You also argued that mathematics was not a language,
obviously claiming that Galileo was 'wrong' and you are 'right'
when he stated that "The book of the universe is written in the
language of mathematics." And you wonder why I find that you
see yourself as God??? Galileo is 'wrong' and YOU are 'right.'
You can be a postive riot sometimes.
{ snip }
> There is a certain imagery that we see in posters generated by their
> words. There is no doubt that you are an angry, and very cruel man.
Is this the same 'no doubt' that tells you that JPB was accusing Judge
Zobel of being a 'crook' ? LMAO ...
Again desi has addressed me.
Yes, it is... as he said, it's called commenting in the 'pejorative.'
And the way you have posed it, it seems quite true... JPB did
not SAY EXACTLY the words "Judge Zobel is a crook." He did
not use the words Zobel and crook in one complete sentence.
But he certainly 'accused' him of being a crook, by implying that
he convicted an innocent person that he KNEW was innocent,
and by further stating the ENTIRE state of Massachusetts
was 'riddled with corruption.' That certainly paints a bleak
picture of Judge Zobel, who represented that STATE in the
trial of Woodward.
>> Even John Rennie, hardly the poster most sympathetic to me (and the same
>> John Rennie who believes that you lie to make a point), points out that
>> LDB's obsessive desire to score just one ... just one point ... was leading
>> him to attribute to me all the ills of mankind ... ask him how he believes
>> that I'm the reincarnation of Genghis Khan ... LOL, Jesus I'm gonna bust a
>> gut, I'm laughing so much ... and the Plague ? Yep, that was me, too. And
>> Jesus, how I wish I hadn't started the Great Fire of London ... oh, and if
>> only I hadn't shot that guard during the Great Train Robbery ... *LMAO!!*
> desi getting a bit hysterical again. He is 'responsible' for none of the
> ills of mankind. HE IS 'ONE OF the ills of mankind.'
'Damn their souls' ... sorry, 'soul's' (sic) !!
Bwaaahahahaaaaa !!! (see, I told you that you'd need it, when reading LDB)
Geena, you'll only need it if you lack the intelligence to say anything else.
>> > GIMMICK # 3 -- More obvious lies. In fact, Desmond has
>> > accused MANY of being pedophiles here,
>> If the glove fits.
> Huh???? You ignorant fuck. Nothing comes across more clear than
> in your four words you have demonstrated that you are an ignorant fuck.
> You're laughable ignorant. A racist, homophobic, pathetic, laughable,
> ignorant fuck.
At this point, Geena, I'd like to propose a one-line silence, in order to
allow LDB to wipe the spittle from his screen.
A TRANSLATION of desi's words for you -- "I understand that I'm
suffering from a mental disorder which makes me find everyone
who is against me must be a pedophile."
>> 'Some of my best friend's [sic] are faggo ... er, I mean,
>> gay's [sic] !!'
> Wow... there is no doubt that you have a mental sickness. There is
> apparently no bottom to your absolute depravity here.
Oops, that 'explosion of confetti' caught the back of my glove. You
'alright' (sic), Geena ? 'Chee' (sic), this is fun, isn't it ?
Hey, if desi is willing to admit that he calls others he doesn't
know pedophiles, thinks that it is an insult to call another
poster a homosexual, and he believes he holds some 'intellectual'
superiority by so doing, then I'm not opposed to leaving it in.
> The fact is you are AFRAID that dolly HAS kept accurate track of your
> posts.
I have 'dolly' killfiled, and give him/her/it no thought, other than when
you try to compare a modified record, with the true contents of the one
archive that matters: mine.
Apparently he was speaking to me --
Of course you have dolly killfiled. Just about everyone does. I
never killfile anyone, yet if I were to do so it would be dolly.
Since the handle ONLY exists, and EVERYONE is aware of
this fact, to insure YOUR posts are archived. You cannot provide
even one instance where you can prove your words were
modified by dolly. In fact, you KNOW it's a bot, and it simply
does its task and nothing more. Dolly makes no other
contribution, and that is something to be thankful for by those
who wish to see your words accurately archived. If a
comment were to be made in those posts, it would simply
provide you some pathetic ammunition to claim your words
were corrupted, even more than you now lie about it. But it's
an automatic process that is accurate. I never give more than
a glance to dolly's posts. But I know how valuable they are
when I search in google for YOUR words. They are ALWAYS
there. And thank you, dolly, for that. You have frustrated
desi completely, although he would never admit it... because
he is helpless, except to lie in denying they are his words.
> One can usually verify that
> by comparing your posts that are still in the active newsgroup,
What is 'the active newsreader' ? Was that something that you learned
whilst 'surfing [sic] Autodin, Milnet, ARPANET, cyphony and the Defense
[sic] Data Network' ? [3]
Well, it's the messages that still remain on the server that
provides you access to Usenet, usually. They are purged about
every two weeks or so. But I thought that desi, being in IT and
all, knew that?
> with how dolly has kept THEM accurate when archiving to google. If there
> was any question as to THAT accuracy, you would be the FIRST to point
> that out.
As I say, 'dolly' is killfiled, and I have no way of knowing, until you
'quotation' (sic) him/her/it, what he/she/it is 'quotationing' (sic).
And I quote desi often thanks to dolly.... since desi needs to be
held accountable for what he says, Geena. Wouldn't you agree
that people need to be held responsible for what they say here?
{ snip }
>> > since he does not archive them.
>> Indeed I don't, and this decision is as much my right, as your right to
>> post anonymously. _That_ is fact, whether you like it or not. The only
>> archive that is 100% accurate, is the one on my machine. Now go on, FW ...
>> whinge about how I wish to 'hide' my words ... whilst posting them to
>> usenet ... ROTFLMAO !! Indeed, having been accused of being a troll, and
>> trolls ... sorry, troll's (sic) by definition wish to be answered, thus we
>> see that on the one hand, you believe that I want to be answered (thus
>> placing my words in google), but that on the other, I wish to 'hide' those
>> words ? Jesus, you really are as thick as shit, aren't you ? The 'cat'
>> that can't decide which fly to chase ... and whose ... sorry, who's (sic)
>> frustration is so immense, at not being able to get up one up on his
>> Tormentor in Chief, that he'll contradict himself in the same post. LOL
>> ... life is soooooo good !!
> Whine... whine... whine... while dolly insures all those whines end up in
> google. And whenever I wish, I will bring them back to life... and you
> can again whine... whine... whine. But, in fact, no one will believe you.
> Everyone here KNOWS that what dolly archives are YOUR words. Thus,
> you are only left with whine...whine...whine.
I for one find it curious, the extent to which you defend the 'dolly'
archive.
To desi again --
I use it frequently. As I said... it holds you accountable. I
may post anonymously, but you most certainly hold me
accountable for my words. Why should you not be held
responsible for yours? I don't care WHO you are (which
seems to dominate your entire presence here - you intrusive
little prick). I care WHAT YOU SAY. I am here to argue
with WHAT YOU SAY. Not who the fuck you are. If you
posted anonymously it would not make the slightest bit
of difference to me. But it seems to dominate your very 'life'
here, which you wish to translate into 'real life,' having no
'real life.' This is an imaginary life,' desi... accept it. We
are only here to express our opinions, and we should be
held ACCOUNTABLE for what we say in respect to those
opinions. Or we accept the fact that we can lie from
moment to moment in respect to what we have said.
You do not LIKE to be held accountable. You enjoy
the fact that you think you can say one thing and some
time later deny you said it, while saying something quite
the contrary. So many examples of what I mean exist
in your words -- death/firebombing/punishment, all
phrases that you change from one post to the next.
That is why you try to imply that dolly is not accurate,
when everyone knows he/she is.
> It is typical of you, to 'quote' me, using lies. Which makes those words
> become YOURS, since they are certainly not MY QUOTES. Thus, it is YOU
> who called "ALL Germans stupid."
LOL ... did I say that LDB thinks 'logic is a language', Geena ? He
apparently thinks it's a language that he has no chance of learning. Let's
see if we have this right ... I point out to the group one of LDB's most
sickening racist slurs, namely that all Germans are 'stupid', and he claims
that this is 'prove' (sic) that _I_ think all Germans are stupid ?
Ho, ho, ho ... next, he'll be claiming that he didn't call a German poster
'Adolph'.
I've certainly called one German poster here 'Adolph.' Unlike you I
account for the words I say. And I stand by that word in that
particular instance. But it says NOTHING in respect to ALL
Germans, while you have implied that ALL Germans smell
of sausage. You can 'taste' it in their beer, I believe was your
implication. See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=slrn8tud5u.2dn2.desmond%40lievre.voute.net&output=gplain
And I have NEVER implied that ALL Germans
are stupid. Quite the opposite in fact. And you know it. To
prove that see
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=4QId5.5290%24Yy3.188904%40newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net&output=gplain
My words -- "And, I would also imagine that most Germans
(arguably the most intelligent race on this planet), would
also cry when they see the stupidity displayed by one of
their own." This was in a post to a teen-age German who
was acting like a jerk -- Florian. So I have stated quite
the opposite in respect to the German 'race.' Once again,
all we have from you is lies.
{ snip }
>> ah yes, he's been down that road, too. Did I say that he is an admitted
>> racist ?
> Actually, you are the one now out of the closet in respect to being a
> racist.
There it is again ... expose a racist, become a racist, would seem to be
LDB's motto. Hmm ... perhaps there's some motive behind his homophobia ...
Desi's own words rather condemn him. I have never called him
a homosexual. He called me one intending it precisely to be
an insult. Presumably he finds the very fact that one is a homosexual
to be an insult. I LOVE being a homosexual, since it proves that
desi is a homophobe. And he has certainly shown himself to be a racist...
in his own words. He can certainly provide no words of mine that would
indicate I'm a racist. Quite the opposite has been voiced by many
members here, QZD for one, claiming I am practically paranoid in
my opposition to racism. I can provide a hundred posts that show
my disgust over racism, which certainly exists in the U.S., and
which is treated quite cavalierly, expressing a latent racism by
both desi and dirtbag. And, regardless of his claims, I have
never called him a pedophile, nor do I believe he meets the strict
meaning of that term (although his sexist posts in respect to
very young teenager girls are rather unhealthy). While desi has
called me a pedophile directly a great number of times.
>> Do I need to point it out, bearing in mind his 'portfolio'
>> above ? Indeed, like his 'idol', Jean-Marie le Pen, he is _proud_ of his
>> racism.
> You really think I care about le Pen. He only demonstrates the
> thick vein of racism that runs through you.
ROTFLMAO !!
Now, I've been sitting chuckling away at LDB's 'offerings' in this
mega-post, but that caused a veritable 'guffaw' ! Le Pen is apparently
proof that I'm a racist ... wow !!
Bwaaaahahahahahaaaaa !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The similarities are rather striking IMHO. And the denials rather
pathetically 'inarticulate,' Geena.
Whereas LDB couldn't _spell_ Baudelaire before reading my post. Or perhaps
... <fx: stifles laugh> ... he 'LOVES' (sic) Baudelaire !!
To desi --
Whereas, you believed I was quoting Hemingway, in my quote
of 'For whom the bell tolls.' Have you rushed to the 'net' and
figured out who John Donne was yet? Hemingway!!!! ROTFLMAO.
You ignorant illiterate pseudo-intellectual bubblehead. And you
are quite forgetful, since you, in one of your arrogant pompous moods
'proofed' a post of mine to Earl almost three months ago, in which I
mentioned Baudelaire -- See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=W7bc9.56933%24Rx4.556346%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&output=gplain
Sometimes it pays to archive your posts to demonstrate how
deceptive others can be. So what do we have now? You are
ignorant of Tennyson. You didn't have the slightest idea what
La Bohème even was... and had to rush to the 'net' and pretend
you were an 'intellectual' who suddenly 'knew' it was an opera
penned by Puccini. You then covered yourself with shit
by presuming that 'For whom the bell tolls,' was a quote from
Hemingway. You did not have the slightest idea who Anna
Kingsmill Finch was. Yet you are supposedly 'educated' in
French Feminist Literature, which MUST have included SOME
Feminist literature from other European countries. I mean, it's
not brain surgery, limited only to the left cerebellum. And you
presumed I was unfamilar with Baudelaire. Literally, ROTFLMAO.
Nor are these all the times you have demonstrated that
'intellectual desi' is one of the bigger oxymorons in the
English language. Admittedly, you have a good grasp of English,
and French (that you are almost anal about), which forms the
entire body of your 'intellectual' achievement. In fact, you are
rather an idiot-savant in respect to those two subjects, and just
an ordinary, everyday idiot in all other subjects.
> When in fact he is simply a run-of-the-mill, rather ignorant, racist.
> The only 'fine line' that desi challenges is that between sanity and
> insanity. Since I have never called for anyone to 'murder desi.'
> Although I do admit that I cannot imagine the thought has not dominated
> the mind of his wife. While desi has certainly called for the
> 'destruction' of EVERY retentionist, in a purge of life resembling the
> Inquisition, with desi as Peter II of Aragon, demanding death by fire for
> all 'heretics' to his 'gospel' of abolition. In fact, that rather fits
> desi. Of course, we can find him now feverishly scrambling to find out
> 'who' was Peter II of Aragon. And presumably when he does, he will
> either claim I 'found it on the net,' or I am being
> 'pseudo-intellectual.'
Damnit, LDB, that chimp o' yours is getting to sound almost human ! What
you feeding him ? 'Rag-head' (Copyright (C) LDB) ?
Obviously, you didn't have a clue who Peter II of Aragon was. An
'intellectual desert,' desi... your mind is an 'intellectual desert.'
{ snip }
[1]
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=Yvzl9.21957%24g73.611756%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&lr=&hl=fr
[2]
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?ie=ISO-8859-1&as_umsgid=5vAv9.78105%24r7.1518508%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&lr=&hl=fr
[3]
url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3484881941d&dq=&hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=Nts48.125415%24_w.17952011%40typhoon.
tampabay.rr.com
[4] I say 'post', but in fact I'm editing this in a separate vim session [5]
[5] quick, incubus !!
Desmond Coughlan
{ LDB's newbie fuckwit attributions tidied up }
> Huge chunks of desi's 'mindless drivel' clipped to respond to only some
> particular ravings among the plethora of 57KB of mindless ravings.
'TRANSLATION' (sic): 'Oh BeJeeeeeus, he's went [sic ... ROTFLMAO!] and
got me another good 'un [sic] ! Quick, snip it all! Sean ? Where the
FUCK [sic] is ma [sic] GUN [sic], boy ??'
{ snip }
>> One need only consider this week's statistics, posted today (I say
>> 'today', as I'm starting to write this on Sunday afternoon ... I may not
>> finish the entire post today) by my server, and which reveal that LDB
>> made 103 posts this week, compared to my 220. Yet when it comes to
>> bandwidth, LDB, with less than half the number of posts, has in fact
>> almost the same amount of bandwidth (497 kB as opposed to 502 kB).
> What does that tell you, Genna? It says that my 103 posts contain
Infantile crap.
> INFORMATION. While his 220 posts are generally one or two lines of
'Incisive, bitin' [sic] comment that has muh [sic] kickin' [sic] the FUCK
[sic] outta [sic ... LOL !] MA [sic] wimmin [sic] !!'
> 'mindless drivel.'
Jesus, there I was typing the comment four lines up [1]. Oblivious to what
was coming after, I was saying to myself, 'Doesn't LDB post a lot of ...',
and then my eyes sort of jumped down four lines, and what do I see ..?
> 'mindless drivel.'
Fucking poetic.
For yes, Geena, there can be no doubt that 99% of what
news:alt.activism.death-penalty has come to know as 'an LDB-fart', is
verbiage. The remaining 1% is immature, ill thought-out, masturbatory,
neo-fascist fantasies of 'pullin' [sic] the switch', or of 'pushin' [sic]
the plunger', or of 'droppin' [sic] the pellets', or of 'pullin' [sic] the
lever', or of 'sendin' [sic] dem [sic] onery ragheads to hell in a pork
skin' ... That still leaves 99% of hot air mixed with flakes of shite.
There's undoubtedly a mathematical formula somewhere, that would allow us
to calculate the mean of the standard deviation to the sum of the product
of the volume of hot air that LDB puts out daily, but as he'll tell you,
I'm no mathematician (look, here he comes himself ...).
However, should we require the advice of an 'unbiased' poster such as John
Rennie (who has even been called 'respected' by LDB [3]), let's consider
what he had to say about it on 8 (what LDB would call '7/8' (sic)) July of
this year ...
'You know PV you get away with an awful lot on this news group
merely because you bury your totally nonsensical ideas in a mass
of verbiage.' [4]
Of course, I'm in too good a mood to remind the group that the above post
also constitutes the now almost obligatory spanking of LDB's 'ass' (sic),
concerning his clueless, Russian immigrant English. Oh fuck it, I'll do it
anyway ...
'No one can "insure"'
*guffaw!!* [5]
> That's why I'm keeping track of them.
LOL ! So now 'keeping track of' has passed into LDB's dictionary as the
new definition of 'obsession'. You should know, Geena, that LDB isn't
obsessed with me, and that in fact, his answering 100% (yes, 100% ! Not
95%, not 99.9%, but a stomping, stadium-filling, written-in-ten-foot-high-
letters, shout-it-from-the-hilltops, one hundred percent !!) of my posts,
is a 'service to the group'.
Yup.
Come on, Geena, what you mean you don't believe him ?? LDB, 'lie' ??!!
> Since 26 Oct, less than a month, over 400 posts from desi containing
> NOTHING but 'mindless drivel.' See my daily accumulations of that drivel
> in "Desi 'mindless drivel'"
LOL ...
> See my daily accumulations of that drivel
Bwwaaaahahahahaha !!!
{ snip }
>> And there it is again.
{ snip '9-on-Richter-Scale' thumping of LDB's 'ass' (sic)
> And there it is again...
Jesus, this morning, he was content to wait 27 minutes to copy me, now he's
doing it in the same post ! He'll soon be posting my words _before_ I
do [7] !
{ snip }
>> Which expresses 'true love' for murderers (who you call 'victims'
>> and refer to the real victims as responsible for being murdered),
> And yet another blatant fabrication.
> Pardon me?
We do. All the time. If we didn't, there'd already have been a 'contract'
out on you. Oops, sorry: that one was 'plagiarized' (sic).
> You're claiming that you haven't called murderers 'victims'???
Geena, nothing is more undignified than a man who tries to run with his
trousers around his ankles, as LDB is doing right now. It's even more
harrowing when there's me or dirt, or Peter Morris, or another of LDB's
'tormentors' running along behind him, thwacking his arse at regular
intervals with a large and heavy broomstick.
Let's consider what LDB wrote, Geena ...
>> Which expresses 'true love' for murderers (who you call 'victims'
>> and refer to the real victims as responsible for being murdered),
Now, there are three points in that sentence. Allow me to list them in a
more convenient form for you, Geena :
1. 'desi [sic] expresses true love for murderers'
2. 'desi [sic] calls murderers "victims"'
3. 'desi [sic] refers to victims as being "responsible"'
Let's consider these points one by one, Geena, for whilst I enjoy a
cruel little *chuckle* when I see LDB post such easily disproved
allegations, I must remember what his doctor said about not throwing things
at his computer screen. 'Restraint' is the operative word.
1. 'desi [sic] expresses true love for murderers'
Of course, I did no such thing, Geena. Unless LDB is now going to claim
that he can 'see' my 'declarations of true love for murderers'. Much like
he can see 'snigger' after '9/11' (sic), when there is none. Much like he
can 'see' dirt 'denying' that Israel has the right to exist, when nowhere
has dirt said or insinuated this.
LDB certainly 'sees things'. His family has already commented on his habit
of staring at the corner of an empty room, as if 'seeing' an 'old friend'.
Now they know why. He 'sees things'. 'Things' that no one else 'sees'.
Perhaps we should rename him 'Madame Olga'. From now on, we shan't come to
news:alt.activism.death-penalty to read his posts, but will find him in a
brightly-coloured tent at the fairground, wearing huge earrings and with
his hair tied back under a scarf, as he cries, 'cross me palm wi' silver!'.
2. 'desi [sic] calls murderers "victims"'
Again, a lie. I refer to those executed, as 'victims of the death
penalty'. When I hear of an execution, my thoughts are may the victim of
the murderer, and the victim of the execution, both rest in peace. Those
murderers who are not executed, I certainly do not consider 'victims'.
3. 'desi [sic] refers to victims as being "responsible"'
Again, a lie. At no time have I stated, or even implied, that I believe
murder victims to be 'responsible' for their deaths. Nothing can justify
murder, and I would never claim that it did. Unfortunately for LDB, he
again falls flat in his face and injures passers-by with his earrings, as
whilst do not consider that murder is anything other than the most heinous
crime possible, society does. Courts can and do recognise 'reduced
culpability' when the accused was perhaps faced with extreme provocation.
Some of the 'responsibility' for his own murder is thus 'passed onto' the
victim, and the accused is treated less harshly.
> And seriously implied (as in the case of bobbyc) that the victim was
> 'responsible' for being murdered.
It's usually difficult to tell when you've really irked LDB, Geena. His
posts are generally so 'repleat' (sic) with lies, misquoted 'quotes' (sic),
some more lies, a couple of 'fervent wishes' that abolitionists will all be
massacred à la Jenin Camp, and the rote claim of 'victory', that you'd have
to count the lies one by one, to note any variation. This post, however,
is his 'apple' post. Whereas we say 'an apple a day keeps the doctor
away', LDB seems to be saying, 'ten lies per paragraph keeps desi [sic]
amused'.
He's not far wrong.
> And seriously implied (as in the case of bobbyc) that the victim was
> 'responsible' for being murdered.
Whilst I certainly strongly criticised 'bobbyc' for wishing an execution to
come about, at _no time_ did I claim that she or her son were responsible
for the murder. In other words ...
'PV is again, because he lacks the ability to engage in real
debate, telling lies'. (thank you, 'JPB')
> Just say it, desi... you love murderers, and have clearly expressed love
> and prayers for them. Even if it means freeing them outright or praying
> for them to escape to Mexico.
Oh-hoh ... he's stepping it up to _two_ lies per paragraph. Yep, he's
irked, Geena. Another misrepresentation. In the words of John Rennie ...
'However he has developed the art of snipping other people's comments
to render them laughable. Thus he is able to produce strawmen which
even the original sender often finds himself defending even tho' he
never said them in the first place.' [9]
LDB is referring to a post where I stated what is obvious to every thinking
person: that no executions should be carried out, and that those not in
danger of execution, should not escape from prison.
{ snip }
>> All of news:alt.activism.death-penalty can see the blazing crucifix that
>> LDB holds up, as he bellows his indignation that we in
>> news:alt.activism.death-penalty have had sex before marriage. Hmm ...
>> come to think of it. LDB hasn't sex _within_ marriage for nigh on
>> twenty years. Maybe that's where the bitterness comes from.
> See any sense whatsoever in that comment, Geena? He somehow extracts a
> 'blazing crucifix' from 'God is on no one's side.'
I can 'see' the blazing crucifix. I 'know' it's there. There is 'no
longer any doubt' that you hold it up. 'We' can 'all see it'.
{ snip }
> <clipped outrageous lies in respect to Theodore Frank where I have
> already proved that desi stated he would 'gamble' the lives of
> innocents in freeing Frank, rather than execute him.>
Well done, LDB ! Not only have you adopted many of my phrases and taken up
my 'advise' (sic ... ROTFLMAO !) on matters of grammar and style, but I
note that you're now using my method of formatting text. Excellent !
You'll never be a real Desmond, but you'll soon be able to tell your
friends that you're my 'biggest fan'. Just so you know, I'm right-handed,
I 'dress' to the left, I buy all of my suits from Givenchy [10], and I wear
'Eternity' for men. Get shopping !
>> '"I would like to stand at the place and kill the Jew, who stands
>> opposite me. If each Arab kills one Jew, then no more Jews will be
>> left."' [2]
>>
>> Note the 'quotes' (sic). The intention was clear: to suggest that I had
>> posted those words, when in fact, I had done no such thing.
> What a crock of shit -- the post is
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=ubLv9.79685%24r7.1593261%40twister.tampabay.rr.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
> And my comment was in reference to the three most disgusting
> comments ever seen on Usenet, posted by desi in reference to all
> retentionists that I have noted here before. In reference to DESI'S
> words I remarked
You will note, Geena, that the above explosion of rage, accompanied by tiny
tears and another litre of 'confetti', destroys its own straw man. I will
confess that this is the first time I've seen a post create a straw man and
destroy it again barely a second later. Is this the usenet equivalent of a
'quark' ? Will this new phenomenon devour all of usenet ? Will every post
on all the servers, be sucked in, releasing huge amounts of X-rays ? It's
like standing in a corridor between two mirrors, and trying to count the
mirrors that reflect each other. Then again, I believe that this
phenomenon has already been observed in LDB, by his turning himself
inside-out so often, that he's in fact 'disappearing' up his own arse, and
will soon weigh 1,000 tonnes, whilst in fact not taking up any space
whatsoever.
In short, LDB 'proves' that he didn't say something, that in fact, I hadn't
even suggested that he did ! So the straw man gets created, and destroyed
all without my having to lift a finger ! Wonderful !
{ snip and tidy up Spag-boy's attributions }
>> OK, the count is now '1 true statement'. How curious, however, that just a
>> few lines up there ^^^^ LDB was claiming that I had stated that there was
>> no chance that Theodore Frank would murder again,
> That is not true, of course, and you should examine the reference that
> desi provides.
Now, I can look down into my crystal ball [11], and predict what's about to
happen, Geena. You see, LDB has just misunderstood something that I wrote.
No shame or harm in that. He's only human, after all. We all make
mistakes [12]. The 'intelligent' thing for him to do right now, would be a
shrug and a 'OK, I thought you meant something else', and the matter would
end there. Did I say 'intelligent' ? Ho, ho, ho ... he wishes ! What he
will in fact do when I explain to him what I meant, is that he will
'brazen' it out and accuse _me_ of 'getting it wrong', will claim that the
newsgroup 'knows' that I am a dope-smoking, child-murdering axe murderer
named 'Jake', from Tennessee who drinks his victims' blood, and plots the
downfall of 'America' (sic) whilst being a smelly, non-tooth-brushing
reincarnation of Gengis Khan. Watch ...
LDB, it might come as the biggest shock since you learned that the bread
'served' at mass wasn't in fact delivered to the chapel house by Rudolph
the red-nosed raindeer 'moonlighting' for DHL, but what I in fact meant
when I wrote, 'LDB was claiming that I had stated that there was no chance
that Theodore Frank would murder again', was that you had claimed that I
had stated that there was no chance that Theodore Frank would murder again.
And I didn't. Ever.
{ snip }
> This was because of desi claiming that
> it was not necessary for abolitionists to 'prove' the DP does not deter.
More misrepresentation. This little episode came about because I stated
what is blindingly obvious: a supposition that cannot be proven, is
necessarily considered to be in the negative. LDB twisted it to mean that
I had claimed that as deterrence cannot be shown to exist, it must exist.
Quite clearly, LDB is on the verge of total lunacy. I don't imagine for a
second that he reads my posts anymore. They are in fact read to him by
small green men who pop through the air vents on his computer monitor, and
who wear tartan-patterned sunglasses. He 'hears' dirt's posts as they're
beamed in on gamma radiation from the mother ship ... and Peter's are
captured by the six antennae on his three heads ...
If I had known that his downfall would be so brutal, I'd have gone easier
on him ...
{ snip more insanity }
> I've always claimed, and desi has agreed, that he would 'gamble'
> innocent lives in freeing Theodore Frank. In effect, not actually
> CARING about those lives, as long as Frank is not executed.
A lie, another lie, and a Saddam Hussein Special, all delivered in 'waltz'
time, and intended to 'baffle' the reader into thinking that it's the
truth.
> I've always claimed, and desi has agreed, that he would 'gamble'
> innocent lives in freeing Theodore Frank.
Ho, ho, ho ... I've 'agreed' to no such thing, of course.
>> Indeed, the chances of _me_ murdering someone, are greater than the
>> chances that Theodore Frank would have done so.
> ROTFLMAO... That's the most absurd statement possible.
{ snip 'Butthead' mathematics }
Oh Jesus, I think he's 'gone under' ! Quite failing to take into account
that proportionality is taken into consideration, and making us dread the
next example where no doubt he will claim that blacks being executed eleven
times more frequently than whites for the same crimes, is ''cos we love
their black asses [sic] and want them to get to meet God before us bad
honkey fuckers'.
>>> I'll not apologize for that any further. JPB did not 'call' Judge
>>> Zobel a crook in so many words.
>> You lying fruitcake. He didn't accuse Judge Zobel of being a crook,
>> _period_. It's been said, but bears repeating ...
> Apparently desi now addresses me directly, rather than Genna --
LOL ... LDB is clutching at straws, when all he can retort is 'Oh ! Oh !
Desi [sic] is talking to me !!'
ROTFLMAO ! What's up, LDB, feeling hurt ?
{ snip more tiny tears and tidy up FW's attributions }
>> Most of LDB's lies are as subtle as a brick in the face, Geena. This
>> one, however, is quite subtle. A 'quality lie', you might call it.
>> Well, then again, he _has_ had a lot of practice in getting his lies
>> 'just right'. When he says, 'very young teenage girls', the unspoken
>> insinuation is that of paedophilia.
> Nah, actually it's just seen as unhealthy to any normal person. I would
> think that you'd think, Genna, that there is something wrong with this
> situation. Why would a 33 year old man lust after 15 and 16-year old
> girls, if not at the edge of seeking them even younger?
This is classic emotional blackmail, Geena. LDB tried it with Donna Evleth
a few months back. She failed to rise to the bait, and you may be sure
that if you fail to call me an 'evil pervert called Boris with horns on top
of his head', then LDB will ask you if you're now part of 'The Gang'.
Read that paragraph again ...
> Nah, actually it's just seen as unhealthy to any normal person. I would
> think that you'd think, Genna, that there is something wrong with this
> situation. Why would a 33 year old man lust after 15 and 16-year old
> girls, if not at the edge of seeking them even younger?
'seen as unhealthy to any normal [sic] person'
-->
'I would think that you'd think, Genna [sic]'
-->
'if not at the edge of seeking them even younger'
Did you see it, Geena ?
1. 'normal [sic] people think it's bad ...'
2. 'don't YOU [sic] agree ..?'
3. 'cos if you don't, I'll say that he wants to go even lower than
sixteen, and that will mean that YOU [sic] are a peodophile,
"too" [sic]'
Whilst claiming not to 'care' about what other posters think, he will
threaten and bully the newsgroup into 'recognising' him as the 'force for
good' [13]. If you don't agree with him, he will accuse you of having the
same 'character defects' as those whom he seeks to demonise.
LDB is without a doubt the most dishonest, deceitful poster that AADP has
yet seen. Yet he _dares_ to call anyone else a liar ?? ROTFLMAO !
> I can see a teenage boy chasing girls that young... but desi??
And another ... 'chasing' ? LDB runs away from the 'broom' again, before
falling flat on his face.
{ snip a couple of hundred lines of LDB claiming that I said things I
didn't, denying that he said things that he did, and of some vainglorious
bellowing in Hebrew about the 'evils' of condoms }
>> I have 'dolly' killfiled, and give him/her/it no thought, other than when
>> you try to compare a modified record, with the true contents of the one
>> archive that matters: mine.
> Apparently he was speaking to me --
ROTFLMAO !
{ snip }
>>> One can usually verify that
>>> by comparing your posts that are still in the active newsgroup,
>> What is 'the active newsreader' ? Was that something that you learned
>> whilst 'surfing [sic] Autodin, Milnet, ARPANET, cyphony and the Defense
>> [sic] Data Network' ? [3]
> Well, it's the messages that still remain on the server that
> provides you access to Usenet, usually. They are purged about
> every two weeks or so. But I thought that desi, being in IT and
> all, knew that?
This is one of those 'Condor moments', when I sit back, savour an LDB
outburst much as one savours a fine cognac, wait for him to shut up, and
then take a puff on a finest Havana, before retorting ...
That's called 'a spool', you retard.
Ho, ho, ho ... Jesus, I 'LOVE' (sic) chess !!
{ snip }
> And I quote desi often thanks to dolly.... since desi needs to be
> held accountable for what he says, Geena. Wouldn't you agree
> that people need to be held responsible for what they say here?
ROTFLMAO ! That's the best one yet ! Someone who posts totally
anonymously, lectures _me_ on being held 'accountable' !! That one is a
'keeper' !!
Bwaaaaahahahahaaaa !!
{ snip remainder, 'cos I'm going to do myself a mischief if I go on ...}
OK, so what's the 'score' with this one, then ? What did AADP get for
LDB's obsessive, badly-punctuated, atrociously-spelled, badly formed
855-line 'confetti' ? Well, we got 322 accusations of 'lie !' (accompanied by a
'flick' of the head), we got 893 lies from LDB himself, 104 claims to have
'spanked' me, and 32 claims that 'the voice's [sic] made me do it !!'.
His reply to this will be incantations sung in Swahili, followed by pins
being stuck into a doll resembling me, and constructed with the help of
Drewl and his 'white-stain-covered' collection of photographs of me.
[1] watch LDB insert blank lines above 'mindless drivel', so that he can
claim that what I ... sorry, 'ah' (sic) wrote, was four lines up and
was 'mindless drivel' [2]
[2] now watch him scroll back up like a madman, and remove them once he
sees the above footnote ! LOL !!
[3] when it suits his own perverse purposes, of course ...
[4] url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=verbiage+group:alt.activism.death-penalty+author:Rennie&hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=D4dW8.44793%24MM5.3891010%40newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net&rnum=3
[5] now watch LDB claim that John didn't use a 'sic', so he wasn't
correcting him [6]
[6] damnit, scroll back up, QUICK (sic) !!
[7] and he will now slot in a 'witty' mention of how my posts are so
'unoriginal', that he could 'predict' what I'm going to write [8]
[8] 'Jesus, desi [sic], how do you _do_ that ???'
[9] url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=verbiage+group:alt.activism.death-penalty+author:Rennie&hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=Hk_T7.37858%24pU3.4741533%40news2-win.server.ntlworld.com&rnum=1
[10] no, Jigsaw ... that's _not_ an Italian gunmaker !
[11] cue _very_ unfunny joke from either billytwat or 'David' (sic)
[12] cue 'David' now stroking his weenie and saying, 'But everyone knowth
that you theem to do it often, Dethwaldo ...'
[13] url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl1151189634d&dq=&hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=xMvf9.3250%24R7.69610%40twister.tampabay.rr.com
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 00:09:33 +0000
>
>le Sun, 24 Nov 2002 06:35:41 GMT, dans l'article <1r_D9.204037$fa.4431379=
>@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...=
>=20
>
>{ LDB's newbie fuckwit attributions tidied up }
>
>> Huge chunks of desi's 'mindless drivel' clipped to respond to only some
>> particular ravings among the plethora of 57KB of mindless ravings.
>
>'TRANSLATION' (sic): 'Oh BeJeeeeeus, he's went [sic ... ROTFLMAO!] and
> got me another good 'un [sic] ! Quick, snip it all! Sean ? Where the
> FUCK [sic] is ma [sic] GUN [sic], boy ??'
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> One need only consider this week's statistics, posted today (I say
>>> 'today', as I'm starting to write this on Sunday afternoon ... I may n=
>ot
>>> finish the entire post today) by my server, and which reveal that LDB
>>> made 103 posts this week, compared to my 220. Yet when it comes to
>>> bandwidth, LDB, with less than half the number of posts, has in fact
>>> almost the same amount of bandwidth (497 kB as opposed to 502 kB).
>
>> What does that tell you, Genna? It says that my 103 posts contain
>
>Infantile crap.
>
>> INFORMATION. While his 220 posts are generally one or two lines of
>
>'Incisive, bitin' [sic] comment that has muh [sic] kickin' [sic] the FUCK
>[sic] outta [sic ... LOL !] MA [sic] wimmin [sic] !!'
>
>> 'mindless drivel.'=20=20
>
>Jesus, there I was typing the comment four lines up [1]. Oblivious to wh=
>at
>was coming after, I was saying to myself, 'Doesn't LDB post a lot of ...'=
>,
>and then my eyes sort of jumped down four lines, and what do I see ..?=20
>
>> 'mindless drivel.'
>
>Fucking poetic.
>
>For yes, Geena, there can be no doubt that 99% of what
>news:alt.activism.death-penalty has come to know as 'an LDB-fart', is
>verbiage. The remaining 1% is immature, ill thought-out, masturbatory,
>neo-fascist fantasies of 'pullin' [sic] the switch', or of 'pushin' [sic]
>the plunger', or of 'droppin' [sic] the pellets', or of 'pullin' [sic] th=
>e
>lever', or of 'sendin' [sic] dem [sic] onery ragheads to hell in a pork
>skin' ... That still leaves 99% of hot air mixed with flakes of shite.
>There's undoubtedly a mathematical formula somewhere, that would allow us
>to calculate the mean of the standard deviation to the sum of the product
>of the volume of hot air that LDB puts out daily, but as he'll tell you,
>I'm no mathematician (look, here he comes himself ...).
>
>However, should we require the advice of an 'unbiased' poster such as Joh=
>n
>Rennie (who has even been called 'respected' by LDB [3]), let's consider
>what he had to say about it on 8 (what LDB would call '7/8' (sic)) July o=
>f
>this year ...=20
>
> 'You know PV you get away with an awful lot on this news group=20
> merely because you bury your totally nonsensical ideas in a mass=20
> of verbiage.' [4]
>
>Of course, I'm in too good a mood to remind the group that the above post
>also constitutes the now almost obligatory spanking of LDB's 'ass' (sic),
>concerning his clueless, Russian immigrant English. Oh fuck it, I'll do =
>it
>anyway ...=20
>
> 'No one can "insure"'
>
>*guffaw!!* [5]
>
>> That's why I'm keeping track of them.=20=20
>
>LOL ! So now 'keeping track of' has passed into LDB's dictionary as the
>new definition of 'obsession'. You should know, Geena, that LDB isn't
>obsessed with me, and that in fact, his answering 100% (yes, 100% ! Not
>95%, not 99.9%, but a stomping, stadium-filling, written-in-ten-foot-high=
>-
>letters, shout-it-from-the-hilltops, one hundred percent !!) of my posts,
>is a 'service to the group'.
>
>Yup.
>
>Come on, Geena, what you mean you don't believe him ?? LDB, 'lie' ??!!
>
>> Since 26 Oct, less than a month, over 400 posts from desi containing
>> NOTHING but 'mindless drivel.' See my daily accumulations of that driv=
>el
>> in "Desi 'mindless drivel'"
>
>LOL ...
>
>> See my daily accumulations of that drivel
>
>Bwwaaaahahahahaha !!!
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> And there it is again.=20=20
>
>{ snip '9-on-Richter-Scale' thumping of LDB's 'ass' (sic)
>
>> And there it is again...=20
>
>Jesus, this morning, he was content to wait 27 minutes to copy me, now he=
>'s
>doing it in the same post ! He'll soon be posting my words _before_ I=20
>do [7] !
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Which expresses 'true love' for murderers (who you call 'victims'
>>> and refer to the real victims as responsible for being murdered),
>
>> And yet another blatant fabrication.
>
>> Pardon me?=20=20
>
>We do. All the time. If we didn't, there'd already have been a 'contrac=
>t'
>out on you. Oops, sorry: that one was 'plagiarized' (sic).=20=20
>
>> You're claiming that you haven't called murderers 'victims'???=20=20
>
>Geena, nothing is more undignified than a man who tries to run with his
>trousers around his ankles, as LDB is doing right now. It's even more
>harrowing when there's me or dirt, or Peter Morris, or another of LDB's
>'tormentors' running along behind him, thwacking his arse at regular
>intervals with a large and heavy broomstick.
>
>Let's consider what LDB wrote, Geena ...=20
>
>>> Which expresses 'true love' for murderers (who you call 'victims'
>>> and refer to the real victims as responsible for being murdered),
>
>Now, there are three points in that sentence. Allow me to list them in a
>more convenient form for you, Geena :
>
>1. 'desi [sic] expresses true love for murderers'
>2. 'desi [sic] calls murderers "victims"'
>3. 'desi [sic] refers to victims as being "responsible"'
>
>Let's consider these points one by one, Geena, for whilst I enjoy a
>cruel little *chuckle* when I see LDB post such easily disproved
>allegations, I must remember what his doctor said about not throwing thin=
>gs
>at his computer screen. 'Restraint' is the operative word.=20=20
>
>1. 'desi [sic] expresses true love for murderers'
>
>Of course, I did no such thing, Geena. Unless LDB is now going to claim
>that he can 'see' my 'declarations of true love for murderers'. Much lik=
>e
>he can see 'snigger' after '9/11' (sic), when there is none. Much like h=
>e
>can 'see' dirt 'denying' that Israel has the right to exist, when nowhere
>has dirt said or insinuated this.=20
>
>LDB certainly 'sees things'. His family has already commented on his hab=
>it
>of staring at the corner of an empty room, as if 'seeing' an 'old friend'=
>.
>Now they know why. He 'sees things'. 'Things' that no one else 'sees'.
>Perhaps we should rename him 'Madame Olga'. From now on, we shan't come =
>to
>news:alt.activism.death-penalty to read his posts, but will find him in a
>brightly-coloured tent at the fairground, wearing huge earrings and with
>his hair tied back under a scarf, as he cries, 'cross me palm wi' silver!=
>'.
>
>2. 'desi [sic] calls murderers "victims"'
>
>Again, a lie. I refer to those executed, as 'victims of the death
>penalty'. When I hear of an execution, my thoughts are may the victim of
>the murderer, and the victim of the execution, both rest in peace. Those
>murderers who are not executed, I certainly do not consider 'victims'.
>
>3. 'desi [sic] refers to victims as being "responsible"'
>
>Again, a lie. At no time have I stated, or even implied, that I believe
>murder victims to be 'responsible' for their deaths. Nothing can justify
>murder, and I would never claim that it did. Unfortunately for LDB, he
>again falls flat in his face and injures passers-by with his earrings, as
>whilst do not consider that murder is anything other than the most heinou=
>s
>crime possible, society does. Courts can and do recognise 'reduced
>culpability' when the accused was perhaps faced with extreme provocation.
>Some of the 'responsibility' for his own murder is thus 'passed onto' the
>victim, and the accused is treated less harshly.
>
>> And seriously implied (as in the case of bobbyc) that the victim was
>> 'responsible' for being murdered.=20=20
>
>It's usually difficult to tell when you've really irked LDB, Geena. His
>posts are generally so 'repleat' (sic) with lies, misquoted 'quotes' (sic=
>),
>some more lies, a couple of 'fervent wishes' that abolitionists will all =
>be
>massacred =E0 la Jenin Camp, and the rote claim of 'victory', that you'd =
>have
>to count the lies one by one, to note any variation. This post, however,
>is his 'apple' post. Whereas we say 'an apple a day keeps the doctor
>away', LDB seems to be saying, 'ten lies per paragraph keeps desi [sic]
>amused'.
>
>He's not far wrong.=20=20
>
>> And seriously implied (as in the case of bobbyc) that the victim was
>> 'responsible' for being murdered.
>
>Whilst I certainly strongly criticised 'bobbyc' for wishing an execution =
>to
>come about, at _no time_ did I claim that she or her son were responsible
>for the murder. In other words ...=20
>
> 'PV is again, because he lacks the ability to engage in real
> debate, telling lies'. (thank you, 'JPB')
>
>> Just say it, desi... you love murderers, and have clearly expressed lov=
>e
>> and prayers for them. Even if it means freeing them outright or prayin=
>g
>> for them to escape to Mexico.
>
>Oh-hoh ... he's stepping it up to _two_ lies per paragraph. Yep, he's
>irked, Geena. Another misrepresentation. In the words of John Rennie ..=
>.=20
>
> 'However he has developed the art of snipping other people's comments
> to render them laughable. Thus he is able to produce strawmen which
> even the original sender often finds himself defending even tho' he
> never said them in the first place.' [9]
>
>LDB is referring to a post where I stated what is obvious to every thinki=
>ng
>person: that no executions should be carried out, and that those not in
>danger of execution, should not escape from prison.
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> All of news:alt.activism.death-penalty can see the blazing crucifix th=
>at
>>> LDB holds up, as he bellows his indignation that we in
>>> news:alt.activism.death-penalty have had sex before marriage. Hmm ...
>>> come to think of it. LDB hasn't sex _within_ marriage for nigh on
>>> twenty years. Maybe that's where the bitterness comes from.
>
>> See any sense whatsoever in that comment, Geena? He somehow extracts a
>> 'blazing crucifix' from 'God is on no one's side.'=20=20
>
>I can 'see' the blazing crucifix. I 'know' it's there. There is 'no
>longer any doubt' that you hold it up. 'We' can 'all see it'.=20=20
>
>{ snip }
>
>> <clipped outrageous lies in respect to Theodore Frank where I have
>> already proved that desi stated he would 'gamble' the lives of
>> innocents in freeing Frank, rather than execute him.>
>
>Well done, LDB ! Not only have you adopted many of my phrases and taken =
>up
>my 'advise' (sic ... ROTFLMAO !) on matters of grammar and style, but I
>note that you're now using my method of formatting text. Excellent !
>You'll never be a real Desmond, but you'll soon be able to tell your
>friends that you're my 'biggest fan'. Just so you know, I'm right-handed=
>,
>I 'dress' to the left, I buy all of my suits from Givenchy [10], and I we=
>ar
>'Eternity' for men. Get shopping !
>
>>> '"I would like to stand at the place and kill the Jew, who stands
>>> opposite me. If each Arab kills one Jew, then no more Jews will be
>>> left."' [2]
>>>=20
>>> Note the 'quotes' (sic). The intention was clear: to suggest that I h=
>ad
>>> posted those words, when in fact, I had done no such thing.
>
>> What a crock of shit -- the post is
>> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DubLv9.79685%24r7.1593261%40twist=
>er.tampabay.rr.com&oe=3DUTF-8&output=3Dgplain
>> And my comment was in reference to the three most disgusting
>> comments ever seen on Usenet, posted by desi in reference to all
>> retentionists that I have noted here before. In reference to DESI'S
>> words I remarked
>
>You will note, Geena, that the above explosion of rage, accompanied by ti=
>ny
>tears and another litre of 'confetti', destroys its own straw man. I wil=
>l
>confess that this is the first time I've seen a post create a straw man a=
>nd
>destroy it again barely a second later. Is this the usenet equivalent of=
> a
>'quark' ? Will this new phenomenon devour all of usenet ? Will every po=
>st
>on all the servers, be sucked in, releasing huge amounts of X-rays ? It'=
>s
>like standing in a corridor between two mirrors, and trying to count the
>mirrors that reflect each other. Then again, I believe that this
>phenomenon has already been observed in LDB, by his turning himself
>inside-out so often, that he's in fact 'disappearing' up his own arse, an=
>d
>will soon weigh 1,000 tonnes, whilst in fact not taking up any space
>whatsoever.
>
>In short, LDB 'proves' that he didn't say something, that in fact, I hadn=
>'t
>even suggested that he did ! So the straw man gets created, and destroye=
>d
>all without my having to lift a finger ! Wonderful !
>
>{ snip and tidy up Spag-boy's attributions }
>
>>> OK, the count is now '1 true statement'. How curious, however, that j=
>ust a
>>> few lines up there ^^^^ LDB was claiming that I had stated that there =
>was
>>> no chance that Theodore Frank would murder again,
>
>> That is not true, of course, and you should examine the reference that
>> desi provides.=20=20
>
>Now, I can look down into my crystal ball [11], and predict what's about =
>to
>happen, Geena. You see, LDB has just misunderstood something that I wrot=
>e.
>No shame or harm in that. He's only human, after all. We all make
>mistakes [12]. The 'intelligent' thing for him to do right now, would be=
> a
>shrug and a 'OK, I thought you meant something else', and the matter woul=
>d
>end there. Did I say 'intelligent' ? Ho, ho, ho ... he wishes ! What h=
>e
>will in fact do when I explain to him what I meant, is that he will
>'brazen' it out and accuse _me_ of 'getting it wrong', will claim that th=
>e
>newsgroup 'knows' that I am a dope-smoking, child-murdering axe murderer
>named 'Jake', from Tennessee who drinks his victims' blood, and plots the
>downfall of 'America' (sic) whilst being a smelly, non-tooth-brushing
>reincarnation of Gengis Khan. Watch ...=20
>
>LDB, it might come as the biggest shock since you learned that the bread
>'served' at mass wasn't in fact delivered to the chapel house by Rudolph
>the red-nosed raindeer 'moonlighting' for DHL, but what I in fact meant
>when I wrote, 'LDB was claiming that I had stated that there was no chanc=
>e
>that Theodore Frank would murder again', was that you had claimed that I
>had stated that there was no chance that Theodore Frank would murder agai=
>n.=20=20
>
>And I didn't. Ever.=20=20
>
>{ snip }
>
>> This was because of desi claiming that
>> it was not necessary for abolitionists to 'prove' the DP does not deter=
>.
>
>More misrepresentation. This little episode came about because I stated
>what is blindingly obvious: a supposition that cannot be proven, is
>necessarily considered to be in the negative. LDB twisted it to mean tha=
>t
>I had claimed that as deterrence cannot be shown to exist, it must exist.
>
>Quite clearly, LDB is on the verge of total lunacy. I don't imagine for =
>a
>second that he reads my posts anymore. They are in fact read to him by
>small green men who pop through the air vents on his computer monitor, an=
>d
>who wear tartan-patterned sunglasses. He 'hears' dirt's posts as they're
>beamed in on gamma radiation from the mother ship ... and Peter's are
>captured by the six antennae on his three heads ...=20
>
>If I had known that his downfall would be so brutal, I'd have gone easier
>on him ...=20
>
>{ snip more insanity }
>
>> I've always claimed, and desi has agreed, that he would 'gamble'
>> innocent lives in freeing Theodore Frank. In effect, not actually
>> CARING about those lives, as long as Frank is not executed.
>
>A lie, another lie, and a Saddam Hussein Special, all delivered in 'waltz=
>'
>time, and intended to 'baffle' the reader into thinking that it's the
>truth.
>
>> I've always claimed, and desi has agreed, that he would 'gamble'
>> innocent lives in freeing Theodore Frank.
>
>Ho, ho, ho ... I've 'agreed' to no such thing, of course.=20
>
>>> Indeed, the chances of _me_ murdering someone, are greater than the
>>> chances that Theodore Frank would have done so.
>
>> ROTFLMAO... That's the most absurd statement possible.=20=20
>
>{ snip 'Butthead' mathematics }
>
>Oh Jesus, I think he's 'gone under' ! Quite failing to take into account
>that proportionality is taken into consideration, and making us dread the
>next example where no doubt he will claim that blacks being executed elev=
>en
>times more frequently than whites for the same crimes, is ''cos we love
>their black asses [sic] and want them to get to meet God before us bad
>honkey fuckers'.
>
>>>> I'll not apologize for that any further. JPB did not 'call' Judge
>>>> Zobel a crook in so many words.
>
>>> You lying fruitcake. He didn't accuse Judge Zobel of being a crook,
>>> _period_. It's been said, but bears repeating ...
>
>> Apparently desi now addresses me directly, rather than Genna --
>
>LOL ... LDB is clutching at straws, when all he can retort is 'Oh ! Oh !
>Desi [sic] is talking to me !!'
>
>ROTFLMAO ! What's up, LDB, feeling hurt ?
>
>{ snip more tiny tears and tidy up FW's attributions }
>
>>> Most of LDB's lies are as subtle as a brick in the face, Geena. This
>>> one, however, is quite subtle. A 'quality lie', you might call it.
>>> Well, then again, he _has_ had a lot of practice in getting his lies
>>> 'just right'. When he says, 'very young teenage girls', the unspoken
>>> insinuation is that of paedophilia.
>
>> Nah, actually it's just seen as unhealthy to any normal person. I woul=
>d
>> think that you'd think, Genna, that there is something wrong with this
>> situation. Why would a 33 year old man lust after 15 and 16-year old
>> girls, if not at the edge of seeking them even younger?=20=20
>
>This is classic emotional blackmail, Geena. LDB tried it with Donna Evle=
>th
>a few months back. She failed to rise to the bait, and you may be sure
>that if you fail to call me an 'evil pervert called Boris with horns on t=
>op
>of his head', then LDB will ask you if you're now part of 'The Gang'.
>Read that paragraph again ...=20
>
>> Nah, actually it's just seen as unhealthy to any normal person. I woul=
>d
>> think that you'd think, Genna, that there is something wrong with this
>> situation. Why would a 33 year old man lust after 15 and 16-year old
>> girls, if not at the edge of seeking them even younger?
>
> 'seen as unhealthy to any normal [sic] person'
>
> -->
>
> 'I would think that you'd think, Genna [sic]'
>
> -->
>
> 'if not at the edge of seeking them even younger'
>
>Did you see it, Geena ?=20=20
>
>1. 'normal [sic] people think it's bad ...'
>
>2. 'don't YOU [sic] agree ..?'
>
>3. 'cos if you don't, I'll say that he wants to go even lower
than=20
> sixteen, and that will mean that YOU [sic] are a peodophile,=20
> "too" [sic]'
>
>Whilst claiming not to 'care' about what other posters think, he will
>threaten and bully the newsgroup into 'recognising' him as the 'force for
>good' [13]. If you don't agree with him, he will accuse you of having th=
>e
>same 'character defects' as those whom he seeks to demonise.
>
>LDB is without a doubt the most dishonest, deceitful poster that AADP has
>yet seen. Yet he _dares_ to call anyone else a liar ?? ROTFLMAO !
>
>> I can see a teenage boy chasing girls that young... but desi??=20=20
>
>And another ... 'chasing' ? LDB runs away from the 'broom' again, before
>falling flat on his face.
>
>{ snip a couple of hundred lines of LDB claiming that I said things I=20
> didn't, denying that he said things that he did, and of some vainglorio=
>us
> bellowing in Hebrew about the 'evils' of condoms }
>
>>> I have 'dolly' killfiled, and give him/her/it no thought, other than w=
>hen
>>> you try to compare a modified record, with the true contents of the on=
>e
>>> archive that matters: mine.
>
>> Apparently he was speaking to me --
>
>ROTFLMAO !
>
>{ snip }
>
>>>> One can usually verify that
>>>> by comparing your posts that are still in the active newsgroup,
>
>>> What is 'the active newsreader' ? Was that something that you learned
>>> whilst 'surfing [sic] Autodin, Milnet, ARPANET, cyphony and the Defens=
>e
>>> [sic] Data Network' ? [3]
>
>> Well, it's the messages that still remain on the server that
>> provides you access to Usenet, usually. They are purged about
>> every two weeks or so. But I thought that desi, being in IT and
>> all, knew that?
>
>This is one of those 'Condor moments', when I sit back, savour an LDB
>outburst much as one savours a fine cognac, wait for him to shut up, and
>then take a puff on a finest Havana, before retorting ...=20
>
>That's called 'a spool', you retard.=20=20
>
>Ho, ho, ho ... Jesus, I 'LOVE' (sic) chess !!
>
>{ snip }
>
>> And I quote desi often thanks to dolly.... since desi needs to be
>> held accountable for what he says, Geena. Wouldn't you agree
>> that people need to be held responsible for what they say here?
>
>ROTFLMAO ! That's the best one yet ! Someone who posts totally
>anonymously, lectures _me_ on being held 'accountable' !! That one is a
>'keeper' !!
>
>Bwaaaaahahahahaaaa !!
>
>{ snip remainder, 'cos I'm going to do myself a mischief if I go on ...}
>
>OK, so what's the 'score' with this one, then ? What did AADP get for
>LDB's obsessive, badly-punctuated, atrociously-spelled, badly formed
>855-line 'confetti' ? Well, we got 322 accusations of 'lie !' (accompani=
>ed by a
>'flick' of the head), we got 893 lies from LDB himself, 104 claims to hav=
>e
>'spanked' me, and 32 claims that 'the voice's [sic] made me do it !!'.=20=
>=20
>
>His reply to this will be incantations sung in Swahili, followed by pins
>being stuck into a doll resembling me, and constructed with the help of
>Drewl and his 'white-stain-covered' collection of photographs of me.
>
>[1] watch LDB insert blank lines above 'mindless drivel', so that he can
> claim that what I ... sorry, 'ah' (sic) wrote, was four lines up and
> was 'mindless drivel' [2]
>[2] now watch him scroll back up like a madman, and remove them once he
> sees the above footnote ! LOL !!
>[3] when it suits his own perverse purposes, of course ...=20
>[4] url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=3Dverbiage+group:alt.activism.d=
>eath-penalty+author:Rennie&hl=3Dfr&lr=3D&ie=3DUTF-8&selm=3DD4dW8.44793%24=
>MM5.3891010%40newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net&rnum=3D3
>[5] now watch LDB claim that John didn't use a 'sic', so he wasn't
> correcting him [6]
>[6] damnit, scroll back up, QUICK (sic) !!
>[7] and he will now slot in a 'witty' mention of how my posts are so
> 'unoriginal', that he could 'predict' what I'm going to write [8]
>[8] 'Jesus, desi [sic], how do you _do_ that ???'
>[9] url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=3Dverbiage+group:alt.activism.d=
>eath-penalty+author:Rennie&hl=3Dfr&lr=3D&ie=3DUTF-8&selm=3DHk_T7.37858%24=
>pU3.4741533%40news2-win.server.ntlworld.com&rnum=3D1
>[10] no, Jigsaw ... that's _not_ an Italian gunmaker !
>[11] cue _very_ unfunny joke from either billytwat or 'David' (sic)
>[12] cue 'David' now stroking his weenie and saying, 'But everyone knowth
> that you theem to do it often, Dethwaldo ...'
>[13] url:http://groups.google.com/groups?q=3Dg:thl1151189634d&dq=3D&hl=3D=
>fr&lr=3D&ie=3DUTF-8&selm=3DxMvf9.3250%24R7.69610%40twister.tampabay.rr.co=
>m
>--=20
>Desmond Coughlan=20=20=20=20=20
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>--=20
>Desmond Coughlan=20=20=20=20=20
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1.bredband.com!br
edband!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!fu-berlin.de!uni-berli
n.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 00:09:33 +0000
>Lines: 590
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <tnprra...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><npv5ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><WRGB9.301346$S8.61...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><rg0nra...@lievre.voute.net>
><1r_D9.204037$fa.44...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1038183162 22358620 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
A Planet Visitor
with desi... and he now simply rearranges my words, and
provides a ton of his 'mindless drivel' without actually making
any comment whatsoever. You win, desi... you make Apate
look absolutely guileless, have a unique ability as a consummate
and accomplished liar, and are the acknowledged master
of 'mindless drivel.' Although you are also recognized
as an intellectually deprived, uneducated, inarticulate,
ill-equipped to function, dimwitted jerk. Who desperately
needs the words --
*Fuckwit*
*snigger*
*snort*
*cackle*
*boo*
*bwahahhahaha*
*chortle*
*guffaw*
*wheeze*
*dribble*
*quack*
Without those meaningless 'one-word mindless drivel fit-all' replies,
however, you are actually speechless. It's always fascinating to watch
someone like you... your illogical arguments and insipid insults
provide such a sharp contrast to the real world.
PV
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:tnprra...@lievre.voute.net...
le Sun, 24 Nov 2002 06:35:41 GMT, dans l'article <1r_D9.204037$fa.44...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
<all of desi's 'mindless drivel' as a supposed response to my
insightful and thoroughly documented proofs of his lies, distortions
and evil clipped>
BTW -- Where is that apology, desi?
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 15:05:46 +0000
>
>le Mon, 25 Nov 2002 05:25:15 GMT, dans l'article
><%uiE9.283124$r7.51...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
><abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
>> I no longer give a shit about this thread...
>
>ROTFLMAO !! Just like 'JPB' was 'no longer of interest' when he 'whupped'
>your arse over Judge Zobel. Just like dirt was 'no longer of interest'
>when he thrashed you concerning 'mitigating circumstances'. Ho, ho, ho ...
>now I, with a dynamite mixture of humour, irreverence and refutation of
>your lies concerning me, your 'ass' (sic) has been rendered almost
>unrecognisable.
>
>'Gentle Reader', LDB has been beaten black and blue by every abolitionist
>here, and even by the one retentionist, and most of the deathies. However,
>when he 'disappears' from a thread, you know that the almost bestial
>savaging that he has been administered, has been particularly painful.
>
>Having said that, he usually fires a 'parting shot', claiming 'victory' in
>the face of what is an almost total rout ...
>
>> I've wiped the floor with desi...
>
>... oops, 'spoke too soon ! ROTFLMAO !
>
>Now, where's the 'off-the-cuff' reference to the classics ..?
>
>> and he now simply rearranges my words, and
>> provides a ton of his 'mindless drivel' without actually making
>> any comment whatsoever. You win, desi... you make Apate
>
>... yep, 'thought so. Now, for this 'white flag' to be 'compleat' (sic),
>we require some claim of intellectual 'incapacity' on the part of the
>person who has just 'whupped' (sic) his 'ass' (sic) ...
>
>> look absolutely guileless, have a unique ability as a consummate
>> and accomplished liar, and are the acknowledged master
>> of 'mindless drivel.' Although you are also recognized
>> as an intellectually deprived, uneducated, inarticulate,
>> ill-equipped to function, dimwitted jerk.
>
>... and there it is. Usually, the longer the whinge, the more humiliated
>LDB is feeling.
>
>{ snip }
>
>> BTW -- Where is that apology, desi?
>
>Oh, 'alright' (sic) ... I'm sorry to have thrashed you so hard. Heh ...
>that's a lie *: I _loved_ it !!
>
>*quick, LDB ... jump !!
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator2-sterling!news-in-sterling.newsfeed.com!
fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 15:05:46 +0000
>Lines: 56
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <a8etra...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <DYiz9.321889$121.8...@twister.austin.rr.com>
><rcelqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><QqJz9.112594$fa.20...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><npv5ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><WRGB9.301346$S8.61...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><rg0nra...@lievre.voute.net>
><1r_D9.204037$fa.44...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><tnprra...@lievre.voute.net>
><%uiE9.283124$r7.51...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1038237160 22966059 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-No-Archive: true
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: hello
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 21:30:36 +0000
>
>le Tue, 12 Nov 2002 07:31:37 -0500, dans l'article
><3DD0F4A9...@comcast.net>, Rev. Don Kool <old...@comcast.net> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Oh Janeieeeeeee...come on out aand playyyyyyyy!!!!!
>
>{ tidy up Drewl '50 Horses' McDonald's text formatting }
>
>> Her daughter with trichotillimania. Yes, I remember Janie. Her
>> desire to watch while a proven murderer violated her retarded
>> daughter. She is almost as vile as Karen Torley (Richey).
>
>I can't seem to find that 'quote'. Could you provide a google reference
>for it ?
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>i) now watch Drewl '50 Horses' McDonald dodge the issue, and claim that as I
>don't use google to archive my posts, I can't ask others to do so.
>ii) now watch him issue 'cancel' commands like the fucking limp-wristed,
>child-abusing, alcoholic, chocolate-stabbing ex-con 'asshole' (sic) that he
>is, when he sees these footnotes. ROTFLMAO !
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!feed3.newsreader.com!news
reader.com!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsf
eed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-
for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: hello
>Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 21:30:36 +0000
>Lines: 234
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <st16sa...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <N%1A9.1718$XF5.3...@news2.west.cox.net>
><20021112032407...@mb-ms.aol.com> <3DD0F4A9...@comcast.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1038519201 24869176 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
David McDonald
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote:
>le Tue, 12 Nov 2002 07:31:37 -0500, dans l'article <3DD0F4A9...@comcast.net>, Rev. Don Kool <old...@comcast.net> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Oh Janeieeeeeee...come on out aand playyyyyyyy!!!!!
>
>{ tidy up Drewl '50 Horses' McDonald's text formatting }
>
>> Her daughter with trichotillimania. Yes, I remember Janie. Her
>> desire to watch while a proven murderer violated her retarded
>> daughter. She is almost as vile as Karen Torley (Richey).
>
>I can't seem to find that 'quote'. Could you provide a google reference
>for it ?
>i) now watch Drewl '50 Horses' McDonald dodge the issue, and claim that as I
>don't use google to archive my posts, I can't ask others to do so.
>ii) now watch him issue 'cancel' commands like the fucking limp-wristed,
>child-abusing, alcoholic, chocolate-stabbing ex-con 'asshole' (sic) that he
>is, when he sees these footnotes. ROTFLMAO !
Deswaldo, happy Thanksgiving!
David
Rev. Don Kool
Desi Coughlan wrote:
> Rev. Don Kool <old...@comcast.net> pointed out...
[...snip...]
> I can't seem to find that 'quote'.
Little wonder. LOL!!!
> Could you provide a google reference for it ?
It was "X-No-Archive". Have a Systems Administrator explain that to
you, troll boy. ROTFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bwwwwwwaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!
*PLONK*
Hope this helps,
Don
--
*************************** You a bounty hunter?
* Rev. Don McDonald, SCSA * Man's gotta earn a living.
* Baltimore, MD * Dying ain't much of a living, boy.
*************************** "Outlaw Josey Wales"
A Planet Visitor
> le Tue, 12 Nov 2002 07:31:37 -0500, dans l'article <3DD0F4A9...@comcast.net>, Rev. Don Kool <old...@comcast.net>
a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> >> Oh Janeieeeeeee...come on out aand playyyyyyyy!!!!!
>
> { tidy up Drewl '50 Horses' McDonald's text formatting }
>
> > Her daughter with trichotillimania. Yes, I remember Janie. Her
> > desire to watch while a proven murderer violated her retarded
> > daughter. She is almost as vile as Karen Torley (Richey).
>
> for it ?
>
ROTFLMAO... she must have had x-archive turned off, desi. Lacking
dolly's efforts with enigmacat as well as you, we'll never know.
> i) now watch Drewl '50 Horses' McDonald dodge the issue, and claim that as I
> don't use google to archive my posts, I can't ask others to do so.
> ii) now watch him issue 'cancel' commands like the fucking limp-wristed,
> child-abusing, alcoholic, chocolate-stabbing ex-con 'asshole' (sic) that he
> is, when he sees these footnotes. ROTFLMAO !
Thank you for again demonstrating that you are a proven homophobe,
desi. And if anyone is an 'asshole' in the form of insults they provide,
everyone in this group knows who that poster is. You just simply
insist on holding onto the 'world championship crown' of assholes.
PV