Re: At Last....a repaint job....
Edward Dolan
"JimmyMac" <jimmy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0f58039b-ce8a-4f44...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 11, 7:50 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:956555c1-b721-4821...@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 10, 11:04 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:76ce9e72-6d43-4f05...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com..
>> >> [...]
>>
>> >> > The insensitive misanthrope Dolan knows nothing of the sacrifice,
>> >> > pain
>> >> > and suffering that will haunt others for the rest of their lives. I
>> >> > presume his time in the Navy was a none too traumatic peacetime
>> >> > stint.
>>
>> >> The Great Ed Dolan is the Greatest Hero known to him. Believe you me,
>> >> it
>> >> is
>> >> no easy thing to survive 4 years in the Navy during peacetime. The
>> >> amount
>> >> of
>> >> shit you have to put up with staggers the mind. Once I even had to
>> >> clean
>> >> garbage pails!
>>
>> > Hero is one of the most misused words in any language and Conan the
>> > Librarian perpetuates its abuse here undermining and cheapening the
>> > term properly reserved for what a hero is by definition.
>>
>> > Psychologists or sociologists may explain some day what it is about
>> > that distant land of green mountains and fields merging with azure
>> > sea, that for millennia has acted as a magnet for foreigners who
>> > sought glory there and found frustration, who believed that in its
>> > rice fields and jungles some principle was to be established and
>> > entered only to recede in delusion. When we entered Vietnam, we
>> > became suddenly aware that we were entering into the heart of darkness
>> > and the edge of civilization, but we entered. Our country was
>> > beckoning. Illusion and reality blended into the landscape, and time,
>> > as we knew it, stopped and we became ... bothers in arms.
>>
>> > How does that compare with your peacetime garbage pail detail?
>>
>> How do you know what it is like to serve in the military in peacetime any
>> more than I know what it is like to serve in the military during wartime.
>> However, I think I would rather serve a couple of years in wartime than
>> double that in peacetime. Those garbage pails were really filthy!
>
>
> The operative word are peace and war and it is easy to draw conclusion
> as to which is preferable. I am surprised that you acquire assistance
> with such an elementary concept.
The operative word is TIME in service. Most guys in the military during
times of war never see any action. When you are young a single year can seem
like a century.
Nonetheless military service during
> war but not in the was zone is not so very different than peacetime
> service, so there is little required to know what peacetime service is
> like.
I suspect this is not true. I think a different ethos prevails in the
military during times of war, whether you are in the war zone or not. The
peacetime military, especially the Navy, is well-known for chicken shit
inspections, field days, etc. Sometimes it can seem like a permanent boot
camp that never lets up. Once I got out of the Navy I resolved never to
clean one god damn fucking thing again in my life. Believe you me, I have
kept that resolution with a vengeance!
Service in a war zone is another matter altogether and filthy
> garbage pails do not comprise or constitue the memories most
> haunting. A jerk like you would probably not last a week in Nam. If
> you ran your mouth like you do here on ARBR, you'd likely get
> fragged ... call it friendly fire.
Military service, whether in time of peace or war, is all about getting long
with your fellow prisoners. I liken military service to being in prison.
Trust me on this, 4 years in service is twice as long as 2 years in service
and feels like forever when you are young. Thank God we have an
all-volunteer well paid professional military now. A conscript military is
worthless now that everything is high tech.
>> By the way, you have Vietnam confused with the Congo. That was the heart
>> of
>> darkness - and still is. Vietnam was the center of a thousand year old
>> civilization, strongly influenced by China but still quite distinct.
>
> Conan the Librarian, that was a figure of speech not to be confused
> with Conrad's book by that title ... Gee your such an idiot. You said
> it yourself. You prove it with your every post.
>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>> aka
>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
JimmyMac
> > as to which is preferable. I am surprised that you acquire assistance
> > with such an elementary concept.
>
> The operative word is TIME in service. Most guys in the military during
> times of war never see any action. When you are young a single year can seem
> like a century.
You always were one to favor form over function and quantity over
quality in your many exchanges. No matter how you slice it ... the
operative word is actually SERVICE. TIME is an irrelevant expletive
whereas PEACE and WAR are diametrically opposed indicators that
differentiate vastly different types of service and the experiences
inherent to both.
> > Nonetheless military service during
> > war but not in the war zone is not so very different than peacetime
> > service, so there is little required to know what peacetime service is
> > like.
>
> I suspect this is not true. I think a different ethos prevails in the
> military during times of war, whether you are in the war zone or not. The
> peacetime military, especially the Navy, is well-known for chicken shit
> inspections, field days, etc. Sometimes it can seem like a permanent boot
> camp that never lets up. Once I got out of the Navy I resolved never to
> clean one god damn fucking thing again in my life. Believe you me, I have
> kept that resolution with a vengeance!
>
> > Service in a war zone is another matter altogether and filthy
> > garbage pails do not comprise or constitute the memories most
> > haunting. A jerk like you would probably not last a week in Nam. If
> > you ran your mouth like you do here on ARBR, you'd likely get
> > fragged ... call it friendly fire.
>
> Military service, whether in time of peace or war, is all about getting long
> with your fellow prisoners.
As with everything else, you have a twisted and jaded perspective.
There is rar more to military service that getting on with those
around you but in time of war those around you could very well be
prisoners in an enemy prison.
> I liken military service to being in prison.
> Trust me on this, 4 years in service is twice as long as 2 years in service
> and feels like forever when you are young. Thank God we have an
> all-volunteer well paid professional military now. A conscript military is
> worthless now that everything is high tech.
As usual, you once again parade you ignorance. The conscripted
military ensured a cross section and had higher standards in place for
entrance. Todays military is far different with lowered standards,
more members with criminal records even gang members and these are
the people who are being trained in high-tech an modern military
tactics and then returned back into society now better trained to pick
up where they left off. Now that's a real improvement. You are such
an uninformed dunce.
JimmyMac
And you haven't the experience, acuity or insight required to discern
the very distinct difference between WAR-TIME and WAR-ZONE military
SERVICE, and I haven't the time or inclination to enlighten you.
JimmyMac
And you haven't the experience, acuity or insight required to discern
the very distinct difference between WAR-TIME and WAR-ZONE military
SERVICE, and I haven't the time or inclination to enlighten you.
> The peacetime military, especially the Navy, is well-known for chicken shit
Edward Dolan
> whereas PEACE and WAR are diametrically opposed indicators that
> differentiate vastly different types of service and the experiences
> inherent to both.
You are talking about peace and war, I am talking about time in service. I
would rather serve two years in service in time of war than 4 years in
service in time of peace. What is there about that you do not understand?
You have got everything backwards. The conscript military was worthless and
always has been. Half the guys there do not want to be there and do a piss
poor job of everything. The present professional military is made up of
warriors who want to be there. Thank God this country still produces such
types. Nixon was a genius for getting rid of the draft and replacing it with
an all- volunteer military.
Edward Dolan
Very few military are ever on or near the front lines (war zone). But the
entire ethos of being in the military is different in war time than peace
time.
>> The peacetime military, especially the Navy, is well-known for chicken
>> shit
>> inspections, field days, etc. Sometimes it can seem like a permanent boot
>> camp that never lets up. Once I got out of the Navy I resolved never to
>> clean one god damn fucking thing again in my life. Believe you me, I have
>> kept that resolution with a vengeance!
>>
>> Service in a war zone is another matter altogether and filthy
Maybe so, but it is experienced by the few, not the many.
JimmyMac
This all started with you pitchin' a bitch over Harry 's POW/MIA flag
which reflects war-time and not peace-time military activity, so who
deviated from the topic focus? You are so incredibly dense. In
answer to your question, I would rather serve 2 years in the military
than 4 in peace-time, but the more pertinent question is would you
rather spend 4 years in the military during peace-time or two year
during war-time AND in a war-zone? I answered your question and
expect you to extend me the same courtesy.
> >> > Nonetheless military service during
> >> > war but not in the war zone is not so very different than peacetime
> >> > service, so there is little required to know what peacetime service is
> >> > like.
>
> >> I suspect this is not true. I think a different ethos prevails in the
> >> military during times of war, whether you are in the war zone or not. The
> >> peacetime military, especially the Navy, is well-known for chicken shit
> >> inspections, field days, etc. Sometimes it can seem like a permanent boot
> >> camp that never lets up. Once I got out of the Navy I resolved never to
> >> clean one god damn fucking thing again in my life. Believe you me, I have
> >> kept that resolution with a vengeance!
>
> >> > Service in a war zone is another matter altogether and filthy
> >> > garbage pails do not comprise or constitute the memories most
> >> > haunting. A jerk like you would probably not last a week in Nam. If
> >> > you ran your mouth like you do here on ARBR, you'd likely get
> >> > fragged ... call it friendly fire.
>
> >> Military service, whether in time of peace or war, is all about getting
> >> long
> >> with your fellow prisoners.
Getting LONG?
Conscription has its drawback as you have pointed out, however so does
the volunteer military, especially during poor economic times and
higher rate of unemployment when the dregs of humanity are seeking
employment of any kind. Many of these fall into the category of those
who would otherwise not want to be in the military and have the
inclination to perform accordingly . What do you no understand about
that? What makes volunteer versus conscripted candidate, trained in
the same fashion, any more professional. Not all in the military are
"warriors" and today's military is comprised of more criminals, gang
members, etc. in a military of reduced standards due to the
requirements for ... a few more "good" men". I've got this all
backwards? You're not even thinking straight! The bottom line is that
neither system is perfect and both have an inherent downside. I
recognize this. You don't!
JimmyMac
JimmyMac
The front lines is a concept antiquated by today's modern military
weaponry . No one is safe in a war-zone precisely because of the far
reaches of long distance smart weapons. Consequently ,WAR-TIME and
WAR-ZONE military service is distinctly different. War-time service
stateside is as far different than war-time service in a war-zone.
Having personally experience both during the Vetnam War, I know of
what I speak (write).
Edward Dolan
That was a separate subject. Try to keep up to speed.
You are so incredibly dense. In
> answer to your question, I would rather serve 2 years in the military
> than 4 in peace-time, but the more pertinent question is would you
> rather spend 4 years in the military during peace-time or two year
> during war-time AND in a war-zone? I answered your question and
> expect you to extend me the same courtesy.
I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was of the
caliber of WWII of course.
Getting along of course.
The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are usually
only to be found in our state prisons.
Many of these fall into the category of those
> who would otherwise not want to be in the military and have the
> inclination to perform accordingly . What do you no understand about
> that? What makes volunteer versus conscripted candidate, trained in
> the same fashion, any more professional.
Because they WANT to be there.
Not all in the military are
> "warriors" and today's military is comprised of more criminals, gang
> members, etc. in a military of reduced standards due to the
> requirements for ... a few more "good" men". I've got this all
> backwards? You're not even thinking straight! The bottom line is that
> neither system is perfect and both have an inherent downside. I
> recognize this. You don't!
Professional military warriors have always been far superior to conscripts.
There is just no comparison at all. We are going back to the standards of
warfare that prevailed in the enlightened 18th century before Napoleon
ruined it with his conscripted armies, a legacy of the French Revolution.
I have read studies which show that very many soldiers during WWII would
never even fire their weapons in battle. It takes a true warrior to kill and
to want to kill. We do not value these types enough. After all, there is a
time for peace and a time for war, and when it is time for war, we want the
best killer-warriors that we can get.
[...]
Edward Dolan
>> Very few military are ever on or near the front lines (war zone). But the
>> entire ethos of being in the military is different in war time than peace
>> time.
>
> The front lines is a concept antiquated by today's modern military
> weaponry . No one is safe in a war-zone precisely because of the far
> reaches of long distance smart weapons. Consequently ,WAR-TIME and
> WAR-ZONE military service is distinctly different. War-time service
> stateside is as far different than war-time service in a war-zone.
> Having personally experience both during the Vetnam War, I know of
> what I speak (write).
Wars are not what they used to be. I prefer the 18th century way when only
soldiers were at risk.
The US does not wantonly target civilians (except during WWII) whereas our
enemies mostly do. We must always distinguish between collateral damage and
purposeful damage.
However, what I am saying is that during wartime, the military ethos is
changed. The focus is on the war, not on standing inspections and cleaning
the barracks. See the movie "Apocalypse Now" in order to get some clues.
[...]
JimmyMac
BUT, that set the tone an direction of the discussion from which you
deviated.
> You are so incredibly dense. In
>
> > answer to your question, I would rather serve 2 years in the military
> > than 4 in peace-time, but the more pertinent question is would you
> > rather spend 4 years in the military during peace-time or two year
> > during war-time AND in a war-zone? I answered your question and
> > expect you to extend me the same courtesy.
>
> I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was of the
> caliber of WWII of course.
I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in the matter.
Predictably you did not extend to me the same courtesy that I extended
to you. YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION!
The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state prisons?
Don't be ridiculous.
> Many of these fall into the category of those
>
> > who would otherwise not want to be in the military and have the
> > inclination to perform accordingly . What do you no understand about
> > that? What makes volunteer versus conscripted candidate, trained in
> > the same fashion, any more professional.
>
> Because they WANT to be there.
Their is a different being "choosing" and "wanting" ... between
employment and unemployment ... between food, clothing and housing
and being without food, clothing and housing. Sometimes choices are
the lesser of two evils, so to speak. Why is it that simple concepts
seem often to elude you?
> Not all in the military are
>
> > "warriors" and today's military is comprised of more criminals, gang
> > members, etc. in a military of reduced standards due to the
> > requirements for ... a few more "good" men". I've got this all
> > backwards? You're not even thinking straight! The bottom line is that
> > neither system is perfect and both have an inherent downside. I
> > recognize this. You don't!
>
> Professional military warriors have always been far superior to conscripts.
> There is just no comparison at all. We are going back to the standards of
> warfare that prevailed in the enlightened 18th century before Napoleon
> ruined it with his conscripted armies, a legacy of the French Revolution.
Another tangent. Nope ... not going down that road.
> I have read studies which show that very many soldiers during WWII would
> never even fire their weapons in battle. It takes a true warrior to kill and
> to want to kill. We do not value these types enough.
Sure we do. Maybe that is why the ranks of the military now have
criminals and gang members ... professional warriors. How will you
value them when they are back in the sector of society?
> After all, there is a
> time for peace and a time for war, and when it is time for war, we want the
> best killer-warriors that we can get.
And, that why you were in the peace-time Navy.
Edward Dolan
>> I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was of
>> the
>> caliber of WWII of course.
>
> I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in the matter.
> Predictably you did not extend to me the same courtesy that I extended
> to you. YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION!
No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those who want to end up
there. That was not true in WWII, but it has been true in all subsequent
wars. As long as I was not being shot at, I would prefer to spend time in
service during wartime than in peacetime. Who wants to spend all their days
cleaning garbage pails which is what can happen to you in the military
during peacetime.
[...]
>> The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are usually
>> only to be found in our state prisons.
>
> The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
> well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state prisons?
> Don't be ridiculous.
The military will not take those who have serious criminal records. Bad for
morale you know. Those presently residing in prisons are all serious
criminals. Many of them should be executed rather than warehoused as it
would be cheaper for society to do that provided appeals are kept to the
bare minimum.
>> Many of these fall into the category of those
>>
>> > who would otherwise not want to be in the military and have the
>> > inclination to perform accordingly . What do you no understand about
>> > that? What makes volunteer versus conscripted candidate, trained in
>> > the same fashion, any more professional.
>>
>> Because they WANT to be there.
>
> Their is a different being "choosing" and "wanting" ... between
> employment and unemployment ... between food, clothing and housing
> and being without food, clothing and housing. Sometimes choices are
> the lesser of two evils, so to speak. Why is it that simple concepts
> seem often to elude you?
We now have an all-volunteer military. That says it all as far as I am
concerned. I am opposed to any women being in the military other than in
traditional feminine roles. Women after all do not know how to kick ass.
[...]
>> After all, there is a
>> time for peace and a time for war, and when it is time for war, we want
>> the
>> best killer-warriors that we can get.
>
> And, that why you were in the peace-time Navy.
I did not want to end up in the Army. Young men were still being drafted
back then.
JimmyMac
YOU SHOULD BE GRATEFUL TO ME FOR HAVING BEEN COURTEOUS ENOUGH TO
EXTEND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO GRACEFULLY RECOVER FROM WHAT APPEARS
TO HAVE BEEN A FREUDIAN SLIP (READ... UNINTENTIONAL, SELF-INFLICTED
SEXUAL INNUENDO)
JimmyMac
YOU SHOULD BE GRATEFUL TO ME FOR HAVING BEEN COURTEOUS ENOUGH TO
EXTEND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO GRACEFULLY RECOVER FROM WHAT APPEARS
TO HAVE BEEN A FREUDIAN SLIP (READ... UNINTENTIONAL, SELF-INFLICTED
SEXUAL INNUENDO)
> >> > As with everything else, you have a twisted and jaded perspective.
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:fc92f805-a914-4051...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 15, 11:05 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was of
> >> the
> >> caliber of WWII of course.
>
> > I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in the matter.
> > Predictably you did not extend to me the same courtesy that I extended
> > to you. YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION!
>
> No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those who want to end up
> there.
YOU STATED ... I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war.
I REPLIED ... I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in
the matter.
YOU REPLIED ... No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those
who want to end up there.
The point is that not all those who ended up in Vietnam chose to be
there or wanted to be there and I count myself among them. "Being
dumb" played no role in the selcwtion process.
> That was not true in WWII, but it has been true in all subsequent
> wars. As long as I was not being shot at, I would prefer to spend time in
> service during wartime than in peacetime.
You did not answer the question asked. I asked if you would rather
spene 4 years in a pecae-time military or 2 years in a war-time
military ... IN A WAR ZONE. You continue to confuse WAR-TIME and WAR-
ZONE. ON doe not have to be shot at to die in a war-zone ... happens
all the time.
> Who wants to spend all their days
> cleaning garbage pails which is what can happen to you in the military
> during peacetime.
> [...]
Apparently they found a job for which you were suitably qualified.
> >> The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are usually
> >> only to be found in our state prisons.
>
> > The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
> > well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state prisons?
> > Don't be ridiculous.
>
> The military will not take those who have serious criminal records.
Currently their are waivers for an assortment of crimes for which one
would be sreened out if employing a job in the private sector and gang-
bangers are commonplace in the military. Gang graffiti can now be
found all over Iraq.
> Bad for morale you know.
And, gang-bangers are good for morale, right?
> Those presently residing in prisons are all serious
> criminals.
There are also those in prison mistakenly convicted and there are
criminal roving the streets who have yet to be caught and convicted.
> Many of them should be executed rather than warehoused as it
> would be cheaper for society to do that provided appeals are kept to the
> bare minimum.
That is an irrelevant, diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go
there. You do have problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you
have attention deficit disorder?
> >> Many of these fall into the category of those
>
> >> > who would otherwise not want to be in the military and have the
> >> > inclination to perform accordingly . What do you no understand about
> >> > that? What makes volunteer versus conscripted candidate, trained in
> >> > the same fashion, any more professional.
>
> >> Because they WANT to be there.
>
> > Their is a different being "choosing" and "wanting" ... between
> > employment and unemployment ... between food, clothing and housing
> > and being without food, clothing and housing. Sometimes choices are
> > the lesser of two evils, so to speak. Why is it that simple concepts
> > seem often to elude you?
> We now have an all-volunteer military. That says it all as far as I am
> concerned.
IT??? vague pronoun reference ... says what? When confronted with
reason and logic, Ed Dolan deliberately becomes vague and diffusive in
order to confuse his adversary. Didn't work Ed.
I am opposed to any women being in the military other than in
> traditional feminine roles. Women after all do not know how to kick ass.
> [...]
You addressed not a single issue raise above ... not uncommon when you
are confronted with irrefutable logic and have nothing to offer in
response. Checkmate. Women in the military is another irrelevant,
diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go there. You do have
problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you have attention deficit
disorder? I will say this much, Israel has quite a few women in the
military and I dare say they could kick your ass.
> >> After all, there is a
> >> time for peace and a time for war, and when it is time for war, we want
> >> the
> >> best killer-warriors that we can get.
>
> > And, that's why you were in the peace-time Navy.
>
> I did not want to end up in the Army. Young men were still being drafted
> back then.
Old yellar barks loudly.
Edward Dolan
> On Apr 15, 4:13 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:fc92f805-a914-4051...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Apr 15, 11:05 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was of
>> >> the
>> >> caliber of WWII of course.
>>
>> > I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in the matter.
>> > Predictably you did not extend to me the same courtesy that I extended
>> > to you. YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION!
>>
>> No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those who want to end up
>> there.
>
> YOU STATED ... I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war.
I said war ZONE.
> I REPLIED ... I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in
> the matter.
>
> YOU REPLIED ... No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those
> who want to end up there.
>
> The point is that not all those who ended up in Vietnam chose to be
> there or wanted to be there and I count myself among them. "Being
> dumb" played no role in the selcwtion process.
You were not part of a professional all-volunteer military. If you had been,
you would have wanted to be there. But even in a draft military, it possible
to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever end up in
a war zone. Even being in Vietnam was not all that dangerous provided you
were not grunt infantry.
>> That was not true in WWII, but it has been true in all subsequent
>> wars. As long as I was not being shot at, I would prefer to spend time in
>> service during wartime than in peacetime.
>
> You did not answer the question asked. I asked if you would rather
> spene 4 years in a pecae-time military or 2 years in a war-time
> military ... IN A WAR ZONE. You continue to confuse WAR-TIME and WAR-
> ZONE. ON doe not have to be shot at to die in a war-zone ... happens
> all the time.
I would choose to be in a war zone because I know it is not very dangerous
provided you are not going out on patrol engaging the enemy. By the way
plenty of military personnel die in peacetime due to accidents.
>> Who wants to spend all their days
>> cleaning garbage pails which is what can happen to you in the military
>> during peacetime.
>> [...]
>
> Apparently they found a job for which you were suitably qualified.
It was part of KP at boot camp. but you never got away from the chicken shit
inspections and field days. Always cleaning, cleaning, cleaning. Fuck the
Navy!
>> >> The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are
>> >> usually
>> >> only to be found in our state prisons.
>>
>> > The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
>> > well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state prisons?
>> > Don't be ridiculous.
>>
>> The military will not take those who have serious criminal records.
>
> Currently their are waivers for an assortment of crimes for which one
> would be sreened out if employing a job in the private sector and gang-
> bangers are commonplace in the military. Gang graffiti can now be
> found all over Iraq.
Gang graffiti can be found all over Worthington and most other places in
America. But it is not murder, only an eyesore.
>> Bad for morale you know.
>
> And, gang-bangers are good for morale, right?
>
>> Those presently residing in prisons are all serious
>> criminals.
>
> There are also those in prison mistakenly convicted and there are
> criminal roving the streets who have yet to be caught and convicted.
But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have to fuck
up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society today.
>> Many of them should be executed rather than warehoused as it
>> would be cheaper for society to do that provided appeals are kept to the
>> bare minimum.
>
> That is an irrelevant, diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go
> there. You do have problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you
> have attention deficit disorder?
Narrow discussions don't interest me, especially when all that is going on
is your stalking behavior. The entire newsgroup is sick to death of you ever
since the days of Ed Gin.
[...]
> I am opposed to any women being in the military other than in
>> traditional feminine roles. Women after all do not know how to kick ass.
>> [...]
>
> You addressed not a single issue raise above ... not uncommon when you
> are confronted with irrefutable logic and have nothing to offer in
> response. Checkmate. Women in the military is another irrelevant,
> diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go there. You do have
> problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you have attention deficit
> disorder? I will say this much, Israel has quite a few women in the
> military and I dare say they could kick your ass.
Nope - women do not know how to kick ass. However it may be that your wife
could kick your sorry ass, but that is because you are a pathetic stalker
given to sexual innuendo who befriends criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin.
In other words, a weakling!
>> >> After all, there is a
>> >> time for peace and a time for war, and when it is time for war, we
>> >> want
>> >> the
>> >> best killer-warriors that we can get.
>>
>> > And, that's why you were in the peace-time Navy.
>>
>> I did not want to end up in the Army. Young men were still being drafted
>> back then.
>
> Old yellar barks loudly.
Only idiots choose to be in the Army if they have another choice.
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:17cb0556-fddc-4e72...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 15, 4:13 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:fc92f805-a914-4051...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Apr 15, 11:05 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> >> I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was of
> >> >> the
> >> >> caliber of WWII of course.
>
> >> > I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in the matter.
> >> > Predictably you did not extend to me the same courtesy that I extended
> >> > to you. YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION!
>
> >> No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those who want to end up
> >> there.
>
> > YOU STATED ... I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war.
>
> I said war ZONE.
You DID NOT! You replied, "I would prefer to spend time in service
during wartime than in peacetime."
> > I REPLIED ... I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in
> > the matter.
>
> > YOU REPLIED ... No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those
> > who want to end up there.
>
> > The point is that not all those who ended up in Vietnam chose to be
> > there or wanted to be there and I count myself among them. "Being
> > dumb" played no role in the selcwtion process.
>
> You were not part of a professional all-volunteer military. If you had been,
> you would have wanted to be there.
Yeah right, like no one ever chose to volunteer because it was a
choice they made because of the poor economy and lack of employment,
etc. (lesser of two evils). Get real. You really are out of touch.
> But even in a draft military, it possible
> to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever end up in
> a war zone.
You know nothing of what you speak, but that has never stopped you
before. Where were you when the countless numbers were trying their
best to avoid a war-zone. Where were you then? Arrange? Care to
explain that? You volunteered for the Navy so as not to be drafted
and have a choice of branch of service, just like some volunteered in
an attempt to avoid a war-zone during war-time.
> Even being in Vietnam was not all that dangerous provided you
> were not grunt infantry.
Bullshit. Guess you never heard of tunnels beneath United States
Vietnam Headquarters, rockets, women sacrificing their own children
by attaching live grenade to them an having them approach GIs for a
stick of gum, strychnine laced cocaine, sapper attacks in rear element
areas, etc. . I could go on, but the fact is that you weren't there
and have no basis upon which to formulate an informed decision. There
are some places safer than others, but there is no such thing as
safety in a war-zone.
> >> That was not true in WWII, but it has been true in all subsequent
> >> wars. As long as I was not being shot at, I would prefer to spend time in
> >> service during wartime than in peacetime.
>
> > You did not answer the question asked. I asked if you would rather
> > spene 4 years in a pecae-time military or 2 years in a war-time
> > military ... IN A WAR ZONE. You continue to confuse WAR-TIME and WAR-
> > ZONE. ON doe not have to be shot at to die in a war-zone ... happens
> > all the time.
>
> I would choose to be in a war zone because I know it is not very dangerous
> provided you are not going out on patrol engaging the enemy. By the way
> plenty of military personnel die in peacetime due to accidents.
You haven't a clue. See what I said above.
> >> Who wants to spend all their days
> >> cleaning garbage pails which is what can happen to you in the military
> >> during peacetime.
> >> [...]
>
> > Apparently they found a job for which you were suitably qualified.
>
> It was part of KP at boot camp. but you never got away from the chicken shit
> inspections and field days. Always cleaning, cleaning, cleaning. Fuck the
> Navy!
Boot camp doesn't last 4 years and is not a Navy only experience. KP
and Field inspection is not unique to the Navy either. I had KP duty
in Vietnam.
> >> >> The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are
> >> >> usually
> >> >> only to be found in our state prisons.
>
> >> > The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
> >> > well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state prisons?
> >> > Don't be ridiculous.
>
> >> The military will not take those who have serious criminal records.
>
> > Currently their are waivers for an assortment of crimes for which one
> > would be sreened out if employing a job in the private sector and gang-
> > bangers are commonplace in the military. Gang graffiti can now be
> > found all over Iraq.
>
> Gang graffiti can be found all over Worthington and most other places in
> America. But it is not murder, only an eyesore.
Attempted diversion duly noted. The point is that it graffiti wasn't
found in the conscripted military, because the conscripted military
was not comprised of gang-bangers like your beloved professional
volunteer military.
> >> Bad for morale you know.
>
> > And, gang-bangers are good for morale, right?
N O A N S W E R ! ! ! ! !
> >> Those presently residing in prisons are all serious
> >> criminals.
>
> > There are also those in prison mistakenly convicted and there are
> > criminal roving the streets who have yet to be caught and convicted.
>
> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have to fuck
> up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society today.
How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything? according to
you way of thinking, If were to murder you, but never was caught and
imprisoned, my offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
straight on that.
> >> Many of them should be executed rather than warehoused as it
> >> would be cheaper for society to do that provided appeals are kept to the
> >> bare minimum.
>
> > That is an irrelevant, diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go
> > there. You do have problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you
> > have attention deficit disorder?
>
> Narrow discussions don't interest me, especially when all that is going on
> is your stalking behavior. The entire newsgroup is sick to death of you ever
> since the days of Ed Gin.
TRANSLATION: I don't much like it when I feel trapped by irrefutable
logic. I makes me look bad (read not so great and not as intelligent
or as superior as I claim to be).
> [...]
>
> > I am opposed to any women being in the military other than in
> >> traditional feminine roles. Women after all do not know how to kick ass.
> >> [...]
>
> > You addressed not a single issue raise above ... not uncommon when you
> > are confronted with irrefutable logic and have nothing to offer in
> > response. Checkmate. Women in the military is another irrelevant,
> > diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go there. You do have
> > problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you have attention deficit
> > disorder? I will say this much, Israel has quite a few women in the
> > military and I dare say they could kick your ass.
>
> Nope - women do not know how to kick ass. However it may be that your wife
> could kick your sorry ass, but that is because you are a pathetic stalker
> given to sexual innuendo who befriends criminal vandal trolls like Ed Gin.
> In other words, a weakling!
Running out of material or is there a writer's strike?
> >> >> After all, there is a
> >> >> time for peace and a time for war, and when it is time for war, we
> >> >> want
> >> >> the
> >> >> best killer-warriors that we can get.
>
> >> > And, that's why you were in the peace-time Navy.
>
> >> I did not want to end up in the Army. Young men were still being drafted
> >> back then.
>
> > Old yellar barks loudly.
>
> Only idiots choose to be in the Army if they have another choice.
Once draftee, one has little choice in the matter. I wasn't about to
volunteer for 4 year only to have cleaning of garbage pails to bitch
about on a internet forum. Based on boot camp test scores I was
pressured to sign on for another two and become and officer. I turned
down the offer.
Edward Dolan
> On Apr 15, 9:24 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:17cb0556-fddc-4e72...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 15, 4:13 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> >> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:fc92f805-a914-4051...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> > On Apr 15, 11:05 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> >> [...]
>> >> >> I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> caliber of WWII of course.
>>
>> >> > I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in the matter.
>> >> > Predictably you did not extend to me the same courtesy that I
>> >> > extended
>> >> > to you. YOU DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION!
>>
>> >> No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those who want to end up
>> >> there.
>>
>> > YOU STATED ... I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war.
>>
>> I said war ZONE.
>
> You DID NOT! You replied, "I would prefer to spend time in service
> during wartime than in peacetime."
Here is the relevant statement:
>> I would never be dumb enough to end up in a war zone, unless it was of
>> the
>> caliber of WWII of course.
>> > I REPLIED ... I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in
>> > the matter.
>>
>> > YOU REPLIED ... No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those
>> > who want to end up there.
>>
>> > The point is that not all those who ended up in Vietnam chose to be
>> > there or wanted to be there and I count myself among them. "Being
>> > dumb" played no role in the selcwtion process.
>>
>> You were not part of a professional all-volunteer military. If you had
>> been,
>> you would have wanted to be there.
>
> Yeah right, like no one ever chose to volunteer because it was a
> choice they made because of the poor economy and lack of employment,
> etc. (lesser of two evils). Get real. You really are out of touch.
Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and what
they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
>> But even in a draft military, it possible
>> to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever end up
>> in
>> a war zone.
>
> You know nothing of what you speak, but that has never stopped you
> before. Where were you when the countless numbers were trying their
> best to avoid a war-zone. Where were you then? Arrange? Care to
> explain that? You volunteered for the Navy so as not to be drafted
> and have a choice of branch of service, just like some volunteered in
> an attempt to avoid a war-zone during war-time.
All it takes is some minimum of brains. Too bad that lets you out.
>> Even being in Vietnam was not all that dangerous provided you
>> were not grunt infantry.
>
> Bullshit. Guess you never heard of tunnels beneath United States
> Vietnam Headquarters, rockets, women sacrificing their own children
> by attaching live grenade to them an having them approach GIs for a
> stick of gum, strychnine laced cocaine, sapper attacks in rear element
> areas, etc. . I could go on, but the fact is that you weren't there
> and have no basis upon which to formulate an informed decision. There
> are some places safer than others, but there is no such thing as
> safety in a war-zone.
See the movie "Apocalypse Now" to know how the majority did their time in
Vietnam.
The Navy is a very tradition bound service, much more so than any of the
other services, with the possible exception of the Marines.
>> >> >> The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are
>> >> >> usually
>> >> >> only to be found in our state prisons.
>>
>> >> > The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
>> >> > well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state
>> >> > prisons?
>> >> > Don't be ridiculous.
>>
>> >> The military will not take those who have serious criminal records.
>>
>> > Currently their are waivers for an assortment of crimes for which one
>> > would be sreened out if employing a job in the private sector and gang-
>> > bangers are commonplace in the military. Gang graffiti can now be
>> > found all over Iraq.
>>
>> Gang graffiti can be found all over Worthington and most other places in
>> America. But it is not murder, only an eyesore.
>
> Attempted diversion duly noted. The point is that it graffiti wasn't
> found in the conscripted military, because the conscripted military
> was not comprised of gang-bangers like your beloved professional
> volunteer military.
The culture has changed in the intervening years. Society overall is more
rotten now than it ever was before.
[...]
>> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have to
>> fuck
>> up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society today.
>
> How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything? according to
> you way of thinking, If were to murder you, but never was caught and
> imprisoned, my offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
> straight on that.
You would be caught right away because this correspondnece is being
preserved for all eternity by Google. I have also given your name to the
local police. You would not enjoy our state prisons. Someone like Ed Gin
would end up having you for his bitch.
>> >> Many of them should be executed rather than warehoused as it
>> >> would be cheaper for society to do that provided appeals are kept to
>> >> the
>> >> bare minimum.
>>
>> > That is an irrelevant, diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go
>> > there. You do have problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you
>> > have attention deficit disorder?
>>
>> Narrow discussions don't interest me, especially when all that is going
>> on
>> is your stalking behavior. The entire newsgroup is sick to death of you
>> ever
>> since the days of Ed Gin.
>
> TRANSLATION: I don't much like it when I feel trapped by irrefutable
> logic. I makes me look bad (read not so great and not as intelligent
> or as superior as I claim to be).
Translation: I do not like pathetic stalkers who are given to sexual
innuendo. Why not run this post past your wife and see what she thinks of
it - and you?
[...]
Fucking Regards,
JimmyMac
What is relevant here is that your response did not answer the
question as asked.
> >> > I REPLIED ... I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in
>
>
>
> >> > the matter.
>
> >> > YOU REPLIED ... No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those
> >> > who want to end up there.
>
> >> > The point is that not all those who ended up in Vietnam chose to be
> >> > there or wanted to be there and I count myself among them. "Being
> >> > dumb" played no role in the selction process.
>
> >> You were not part of a professional all-volunteer military. If you had
> >> been,
> >> you would have wanted to be there.
>
> > Yeah right, like no one ever chose to volunteer because it was a
> > choice they made because of the poor economy and lack of employment,
> > etc. (lesser of two evils). Get real. You really are out of touch.
>
> Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and what
> they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
And what about what they are fleeing from that in some instances
initiated the decision ... the flip-side of the equation? What do you
not understand about people having to make difficult choices between
two alternatives that they would rather not have to chose between
given a different wet circumstances?
> >> But even in a draft military, it possible
> >> to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever end up
> >> in
> >> a war zone.
>
> > You know nothing of what you speak, but that has never stopped you
> > before. Where were you when the countless numbers were trying their
> > best to avoid a war-zone. Where were you then? Arrange? Care to
> > explain that? You volunteered for the Navy so as not to be drafted
> > and have a choice of branch of service, just like some volunteered in
> > an attempt to avoid a war-zone during war-time.
>
> All it takes is some minimum of brains. Too bad that lets you out.
A gratuitous insult is no substitute for logic and/or reasoning.
Typically, you failed to address any issue raised above ... a common
practice of yours when you have nothing to offer to substantiate
something you thoughtlessly said hoping for it to be accepted at face
value without being questioned. I'm still awaiting your explanation.
Don't have one ... do you?
> >> Even being in Vietnam was not all that dangerous provided you
> >> were not grunt infantry.
>
> > Bullshit. Guess you never heard of tunnels beneath United States
> > Vietnam Headquarters, rockets, women sacrificing their own children
> > by attaching live grenade to them an having them approach GIs for a
> > stick of gum, strychnine laced cocaine, sapper attacks in rear element
> > areas, etc. . I could go on, but the fact is that you weren't there
> > and have no basis upon which to formulate an informed decision. There
> > are some places safer than others, but there is no such thing as
> > safety in a war-zone.
>
> See the movie "Apocalypse Now" to know how the majority did their time in
> Vietnam.
I experienced Vietnam firsthand. Saw the movie. Do you accept what
hollyweird provides as a substitute for experience and reality ...
gullible one? Regardless, your diversion is duly noted. Rather that
address any of what I offered in evidence that one does not have to be
a "front line grunt" to be in danger in a war zone, you introduced
another immaterial tangent irrelevant to the discussion . Stay
focused and keep up to speed why don't you. Let me assist you. Re-
read the paragraph above and take another crack at it.
This was not about tradition, but about shared common experiences in
the military. You do have problems with focus, don't you?
> >> >> >> The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are
> >> >> >> usually
> >> >> >> only to be found in our state prisons.
>
> >> >> > The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
> >> >> > well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state
> >> >> > prisons?
> >> >> > Don't be ridiculous.
>
> >> >> The military will not take those who have serious criminal records.
>
> >> > Currently their are waivers for an assortment of crimes for which one
> >> > would be sreened out if employing a job in the private sector and gang-
> >> > bangers are commonplace in the military. Gang graffiti can now be
> >> > found all over Iraq.
>
> >> Gang graffiti can be found all over Worthington and most other places in
> >> America. But it is not murder, only an eyesore.
>
> > Attempted diversion duly noted. The point is that it graffiti wasn't
> > found in the conscripted military, because the conscripted military
> > was not comprised of gang-bangers like your beloved professional
> > volunteer military.
>
> The culture has changed in the intervening years. Society overall is more
> rotten now than it ever was before.
> [...]
Granted, but as I said before, standards of acceptance were once
higher in th military than they are in your beloved volunteer
professional military.
> >> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have to
> >> fuck
> >> up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society today.
>
> > How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything? According to
> > you way of thinking, If were to murder you, but never was caught and
> > imprisoned, my offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
> > straight on that.
>
> You would be caught right away because this correspondnece is being
> preserved for all eternity by Google. I have also given your name to the
> local police. You would not enjoy our state prisons. Someone like Ed Gin
> would end up having you for his bitch.
I'll ask again ... How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of
anything?
If I were you, I'd be concerned about much of what you have written
being preserved for all eternity by Google. I do not live in fear of
the police. The only crime I have committed here on Usenet is wasting
my time on you ... now that's a crime. Besides it would likely go
down like this ... one officer to another. Here he comes again ...
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows. Just humor
the old fool. Take a report and then just shit can it. We've run out
of room in our filing cabinets. Good that my break came at just the
right time. He's all yours. I'm out of here.
Since you deliberately avoided answering my question invoking your
favorite tactic ... DIVERSION, allow me to rephrase what I said,
taking me out of the equation. According to your way of thinking, If
someone were to murder you, but never was caught and imprisoned, the
offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
straight on that.
> >> >> Many of them should be executed rather than warehoused as it
> >> >> would be cheaper for society to do that provided appeals are kept to
> >> >> the
> >> >> bare minimum.
>
> >> > That is an irrelevant, diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go
> >> > there. You do have problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you
> >> > have attention deficit disorder?
>
> >> Narrow discussions don't interest me, especially when all that is going
> >> on
> >> is your stalking behavior. The entire newsgroup is sick to death of you
> >> ever
> >> since the days of Ed Gin.
>
> > TRANSLATION: I don't much like it when I feel trapped by irrefutable
> > logic. I makes me look bad (read not so great and not as intelligent
> > or as superior as I claim to be).
>
> Translation: I do not like pathetic stalkers who are given to sexual
> innuendo. Why not run this post past your wife and see what she thinks of
> it - and you?
> [...]
Answered the wife issue many times before. That discussion is
history , remember. Short-term memory loss is a terrible thing. As
for the rest ... boring, regurgitated copy and past boilerplate
because you can do no better. As for your translation of my
translation, I thought English was you primary language. Time for a
refresher.
JimmyMac
Another copy and past boilerplate diversion? Your translation of my
translation would seem to indicate that you are deficient in reading
comprehension skills. Time for a refresher.
JimmyMac
What is relevant here is that your reply did not answer the question
as asked.
> >> > I REPLIED ... I don't recall the military giving anyone a choice in
>
>
>
> >> > the matter.
>
> >> > YOU REPLIED ... No one chooses to end up in a war zone except those
> >> > who want to end up there.
>
> >> > The point is that not all those who ended up in Vietnam chose to be
> >> > there or wanted to be there and I count myself among them. "Being
> >> > dumb" played no role in the selcwtion process.
>
> >> You were not part of a professional all-volunteer military. If you had
> >> been,
> >> you would have wanted to be there.
>
> > Yeah right, like no one ever chose to volunteer because it was a
> > choice they made because of the poor economy and lack of employment,
> > etc. (lesser of two evils). Get real. You really are out of touch.
>
> Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and what
> they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
So, you realized that you were volunteering for cleaning filthy
garbage pails and enduring field inspections? If so, why whine about
it? Unlike you, I recognize that adults, thinking that they know what
they are getting themselves into, are sometimes forced into make
choices between unappealing alternatives and, in different set of
circumstances, they would make altogether different decisions. By
your own admission, you volunteered for the Navy to avoid being
drafted into the Army. Now that I have provided you with a personal
example, perhaps you can now finally relate to what is an elementary
concept.
> >> But even in a draft military, it possible
> >> to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever end up
> >> in
> >> a war zone.
>
> > You know nothing of what you speak, but that has never stopped you
> > before. Where were you when the countless numbers were trying their
> > best to avoid a war-zone. Where were you then? Arrange? Care to
> > explain that? You volunteered for the Navy so as not to be drafted
> > and have a choice of branch of service, just like some volunteered in
> > an attempt to avoid a war-zone during war-time.
>
> All it takes is some minimum of brains. Too bad that lets you out.
A gratuitous insult is no substitute for reason and/or argument. Care
to take another (less diversionary) crack at it? I await your answer.
> >> Even being in Vietnam was not all that dangerous provided you
> >> were not grunt infantry.
>
> > Bullshit. Guess you never heard of tunnels beneath United States
> > Vietnam Headquarters, rockets, women sacrificing their own children
> > by attaching live grenade to them an having them approach GIs for a
> > stick of gum, strychnine laced cocaine, sapper attacks in rear element
> > areas, etc. . I could go on, but the fact is that you weren't there
> > and have no basis upon which to formulate an informed decision. There
> > are some places safer than others, but there is no such thing as
> > safety in a war-zone.
>
> See the movie "Apocalypse Now" to know how the majority did their time in
> Vietnam.
Try to stay focused and up to speed here, will you. This topic is not
about what soldiers did with their time in Vietnam; and, Apocalypse
now did not encapsulate the experience of the majority. Saw the movie
but experienced Vietnam first hand. Your experience is limited to a
single movie and you accept Hollywierd's portrayal in lieu of
experience and reality do you? Your favorite tactic ... diversion did
not escape my attention and failed again. Rather than address any of
the points raised above, again you vainly attempted to sidetrack me on
a tangent. You addressed nothing that I mentioned to indicate that a
war-zone is dangerous wherever one is and you have also offered
nothing in defense of your preposterous statement that a war-zone is
safe as long as one is not a front-line grunt. Opinion stated as fact
but unsubstantiated is much to do about nothing ... gibberish.
Still more diversion. This was about commonly shared experiences in
the military service ... not about military tradition. Constantly
trying to divert the discussion off on another tangent to prolong a
dying thread, are you? You have difficulty staying on track and
staying focused.
> >> >> >> The military does not take the dregs of humanity. Such types are
> >> >> >> usually
> >> >> >> only to be found in our state prisons.
>
> >> >> > The current military has criminals and gang members in service ... a
> >> >> > well know fact. Are these not dregs? Are ALL dreg in state
> >> >> > prisons?
> >> >> > Don't be ridiculous.
>
> >> >> The military will not take those who have serious criminal records.
>
> >> > Currently their are waivers for an assortment of crimes for which one
> >> > would be sreened out if employing a job in the private sector and gang-
> >> > bangers are commonplace in the military. Gang graffiti can now be
> >> > found all over Iraq.
>
> >> Gang graffiti can be found all over Worthington and most other places in
> >> America. But it is not murder, only an eyesore.
>
> > Attempted diversion duly noted. The point is that it graffiti wasn't
> > found in the conscripted military, because the conscripted military
> > was not comprised of gang-bangers like your beloved professional
> > volunteer military.
>
> The culture has changed in the intervening years. Society overall is more
> rotten now than it ever was before.
> [...]
That is a given, but the military was once more selective and held
itself to higher standards than your beloved volunteer professional
military of today.
> >> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have to
> >> fuck
> >> up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society today.
>
> > How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything? According to
> > your way of thinking, If were to murder you, but never was caught and
> > imprisoned, my offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
> > straight on that.
>
> You would be caught right away because this correspondnece is being
> preserved for all eternity by Google. I have also given your name to the
> local police. You would not enjoy our state prisons. Someone like Ed Gin
> would end up having you for his bitch.
With the many things you've said on newsgroups, you have much to be
concerned about in the Google archives. I have no fear of the
police. The only crime I've committed here is wasting time on you.
Now that's a crime! I can only imagaine how your report to the police
went down ... one officer talking to another. Oh shit, here comes
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows. Look just
humor the old bastard. Take his report and then when he's gone just
shit can it. We are running out space in our file cabinets becasue of
him. Well, I'm out of here. Time for my coffeee break and it could't
have come at a better time. He's all yours.
Since you failed to answer, again (a bad habit of yours) I will ask
once more ... How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything?
No matter what kind of a twist you put on it, you are deliberately
avoiding my statement too, so allow me to remove myself from the
equation and rephrase ... According to your way of thinking, if
someone were to murder you, but was never caught and imprisoned, their
my offense would not be a serious one because our prisons only house
serious criminals. Glad you set me straight on that.
> >> >> Many of them should be executed rather than warehoused as it
> >> >> would be cheaper for society to do that provided appeals are kept to
> >> >> the
> >> >> bare minimum.
>
> >> > That is an irrelevant, diversionary, tangential topic. I'll not go
> >> > there. You do have problems focusing on the topic at hand? Do you
> >> > have attention deficit disorder?
>
> >> Narrow discussions don't interest me,
They should since you are narrow-minded.
> >> especially when all that is going
> >> on
> >> is your stalking behavior. The entire newsgroup is sick to death of you
> >> ever
> >> since the days of Ed Gin.
>
> > TRANSLATION: I don't much like it when I feel trapped by irrefutable
> > logic. I makes me look bad (read not so great and not as intelligent
> > or as superior as I claim to be).
>
> Translation: I do not like pathetic stalkers who are given to sexual
> innuendo. Why not run this post past your wife and see what she thinks of
> it - and you?
> [...]
Run short of ammunition? Your lame, copy and paste, regurgitated
boilerplate translation of my translation would indicate poor reading
comprehension skills and a need for a refresher.
Edward Dolan
>> Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and what
>> they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
>
> And what about what they are fleeing from that in some instances
> initiated the decision ... the flip-side of the equation? What do you
> not understand about people having to make difficult choices between
> two alternatives that they would rather not have to chose between
> given a different wet circumstances?
Yes, yes ... life is full of difficult choices, but still we make them,
don't we?
[...]
>> See the movie "Apocalypse Now" to know how the majority did their time in
>> Vietnam.
>
> I experienced Vietnam firsthand. Saw the movie. Do you accept what
> hollyweird provides as a substitute for experience and reality ...
> gullible one? Regardless, your diversion is duly noted. Rather that
> address any of what I offered in evidence that one does not have to be
> a "front line grunt" to be in danger in a war zone, you introduced
> another immaterial tangent irrelevant to the discussion . Stay
> focused and keep up to speed why don't you. Let me assist you. Re-
> read the paragraph above and take another crack at it.
Most of those in Vietnam lived a better life than they could have lived back
in the States. Their chances of getting killed were about the same no matter
where they ended up provided they were not grunt infantry. Hells Bells, they
even had that despicable Bob Hope (the unfunniest man who ever lived) there
to entertain them!
[...]
>> The Navy is a very tradition bound service, much more so than any of the
>> other services, with the possible exception of the Marines.
>
> This was not about tradition, but about shared common experiences in
> the military. You do have problems with focus, don't you?
The Navy has a well deserved reputation for chicken shit. It is worse in
peacetime than in wartime.
>> The culture has changed in the intervening years. Society overall is more
>> rotten now than it ever was before.
>> [...]
>
> Granted, but as I said before, standards of acceptance were once
> higher in th military than they are in your beloved volunteer
> professional military.
Who cares if one has graduated from high school or not. It doesn't mean
anything anymore anyway. All that matters is that those who want to be in
the military should be given that opportunity. A nation of 300 million does
not need to conscript.
>> >> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have to
>> >> fuck
>> >> up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society today.
>>
>> > How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything? According to
>> > you way of thinking, If were to murder you, but never was caught and
>> > imprisoned, my offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
>> > straight on that.
>>
>> You would be caught right away because this correspondnece is being
>> preserved for all eternity by Google. I have also given your name to the
>> local police. You would not enjoy our state prisons. Someone like Ed Gin
>> would end up having you for his bitch.
>
> I'll ask again ... How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of
> anything?
I would rather see a few innocents go to prison than the guilty go free.
Some folks are just unlucky and there is nothing to be done about it.
> If I were you, I'd be concerned about much of what you have written
> being preserved for all eternity by Google. I do not live in fear of
> the police. The only crime I have committed here on Usenet is wasting
> my time on you ... now that's a crime. Besides it would likely go
> down like this ... one officer to another. Here he comes again ...
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows. Just humor
> the old fool. Take a report and then just shit can it. We've run out
> of room in our filing cabinets. Good that my break came at just the
> right time. He's all yours. I'm out of here.
If I should die under suspicious circumstances, you can count on the police
showing up on your doorstep with a few questions for you.
[...]
>> Translation: I do not like pathetic stalkers who are given to sexual
>> innuendo. Why not run this post past your wife and see what she thinks of
>> it - and you?
>> [...]
>
> Answered the wife issue many times before. That discussion is
> history , remember. Short-term memory loss is a terrible thing. As
> for the rest ... boring, regurgitated copy and past boilerplate
> because you can do no better. As for your translation of my
> translation, I thought English was you primary language. Time for a
> refresher.
Hells Bells, I wouldn't show anyone what I have been writing on Usenet
either if I were you. But your wife is going to divorce you any day now. I
KNOW she is fed up with you just as the entire universe is. That is why she
is getting a job on her own, so she can free herself from you.
Edward Dolan
>> Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and what
>> they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
>
> So, you realized that you were volunteering for cleaning filthy
> garbage pails and enduring field inspections? If so, why whine about
> it? Unlike you, I recognize that adults, thinking that they know what
> they are getting themselves into, are sometimes forced into make
> choices between unappealing alternatives and, in different set of
> circumstances, they would make altogether different decisions. By
> your own admission, you volunteered for the Navy to avoid being
> drafted into the Army. Now that I have provided you with a personal
> example, perhaps you can now finally relate to what is an elementary
> concept.
I had heard about KP, but did not realize it went on forever in the Navy.
But that is a characteristic of a draft military. They can afford to waste
manpower because they have so much of it. I suspect when you were in Vietnam
you did not spend all of your time cleaning things.
>> >> But even in a draft military, it possible
>> >> to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever end
>> >> up
>> >> in
>> >> a war zone.
>>
>> > You know nothing of what you speak, but that has never stopped you
>> > before. Where were you when the countless numbers were trying their
>> > best to avoid a war-zone. Where were you then? Arrange? Care to
>> > explain that? You volunteered for the Navy so as not to be drafted
>> > and have a choice of branch of service, just like some volunteered in
>> > an attempt to avoid a war-zone during war-time.
>>
>> All it takes is some minimum of brains. Too bad that lets you out.
>
> A gratuitous insult is no substitute for reason and/or argument. Care
> to take another (less diversionary) crack at it? I await your answer.
It is merely bad luck that some end up in a war zone and manage to get
themselves killed. That is the price you pay for wanting to kill the enemy.
You and I are not warriors. But there is never a shortage of such types -
thank God!
[...]
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:59f01595-f041-4224...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 17, 2:39 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and what
> >> they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
>
> > And what about what they are fleeing from that in some instances
> > initiated the decision ... the flip-side of the equation? What do you
> > not understand about people having to make difficult choices between
> > two alternatives that they would rather not have to chose between
> > given a different wet circumstances?
>
> Yes, yes ... life is full of difficult choices, but still we make them,
> don't we?
> [...]
And your point is ... that you again missed the point??? The point is
that not all who volunteer for the military really want to be in the
military, but chose to join because alternatives were even less
attractive and those of this mindset are not ideal candidates for your
beloved "professional" military; and, it is not unreasonable to assume
that their level of performance would be any better than those
unwillingly conscripted. There, since it was obviously necessary to
do so ... I spelled it out for you.
> >> See the movie "Apocalypse Now" to know how the majority did their time in
> >> Vietnam.
>
> > I experienced Vietnam firsthand. Saw the movie. Do you accept what
> > hollyweird provides as a substitute for experience and reality ...
> > gullible one? Regardless, your diversion is duly noted. Rather that
> > address any of what I offered in evidence that one does not have to be
> > a "front line grunt" to be in danger in a war zone, you introduced
> > another immaterial tangent irrelevant to the discussion . Stay
> > focused and keep up to speed why don't you. Let me assist you. Re-
> > read the paragraph above and take another crack at it.
>
> Most of those in Vietnam lived a better life than they could have lived back
> in the States. Their chances of getting killed were about the same no matter
> where they ended up provided they were not grunt infantry. Hells Bells, they
> even had that despicable Bob Hope (the unfunniest man who ever lived) there
> to entertain them!
> [...]
BULLSHIT! Once more Dolan seizes the opportunity to portray the fool,
offering still more opinion stated as fact and no firsthand experience
from which to formulate his nonsensical assertions. Of course, in so
doing, he has customarily inserted more tangential diversion, once
again failing to address a single issue raised in response to his
ludicrous notion that the movie "Apocalypse Now" presented an accurate
depiction of what the majority of soldiers did their time in Vietnam.
The level of absurdity to which Dolan aspires is astonishing.
> >> The Navy is a very tradition bound service, much more so than any of the
> >> other services, with the possible exception of the Marines.
>
> > This was not about tradition, but about shared common experiences in
> > the military. You do have problems with focus, don't you?
>
> The Navy has a well deserved reputation for chicken shit. It is worse in
> peacetime than in wartime.
Since you didn't comprehend this the first go around ... This was not
about tradition, but about shared common experiences in the military.
You do have problems with focus, don't you?
> >> The culture has changed in the intervening years. Society overall is more
> >> rotten now than it ever was before.
> >> [...]
>
> > Granted, but as I said before, standards of acceptance were once
> > higher in the military than they are in your beloved volunteer
> > professional military.
>
> Who cares if one has graduated from high school or not. It doesn't mean
> anything anymore anyway. All that matters is that those who want to be in
> the military should be given that opportunity. A nation of 300 million does
> not need to conscript.
I never once mentioned level of education. How did you confuse level
of education with lowered standards for acceptance (read waivers for
past criminal record and known gang association). Stay focused and up
to speed ... that is if you are capable). Those that wanted to be in
the military were not prevented from enlisting during time of a
conscripted military, or have you forgotten that? Need I remind you
that you volunteered during a time when the draft was still active and
by your own admission were an adult who know what he was in for?
Consequently, you have no reason to bitch about the military tradition
that you chose to become part of.
> >> >> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have to
> >> >> fuck
> >> >> up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society today.
>
> >> > How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything? According to
> >> > you way of thinking, If were to murder you, but never was caught and
> >> > imprisoned, my offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
> >> > straight on that.
>
> >> You would be caught right away because this correspondnece is being
> >> preserved for all eternity by Google. I have also given your name to the
> >> local police. You would not enjoy our state prisons. Someone like Ed Gin
> >> would end up having you for his bitch.
>
> > I'll ask again ... How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of
> > anything?
>
> I would rather see a few innocents go to prison than the guilty go free.
> Some folks are just unlucky and there is nothing to be done about it.
But that doesn't answer the question which was specifically asked
because of your statement that prisons house only serious criminals,
to which I countered that there are serious criminals roaming the
streets and incarcerated innocents in prison.
> > If I were you, I'd be concerned about much of what you have written
> > being preserved for all eternity by Google. I do not live in fear of
> > the police. The only crime I have committed here on Usenet is wasting
> > my time on you ... now that's a crime. Besides it would likely go
> > down like this ... one officer to another. Here he comes again ...
> > Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows. Just humor
> > the old fool. Take a report and then just shit can it. We've run out
> > of room in our filing cabinets. Good that my break came at just the
> > right time. He's all yours. I'm out of here.
>
> If I should die under suspicious circumstances, you can count on the police
> showing up on your doorstep with a few questions for you.
> [...]
No need, the grim reaper will sell to that soon. Your response is
rather telling though. Apparently you live in fear of reprisal. That
be the case, I presume you turned in lots more names, because you must
surely be aware that I am only one among many whom you have endeared
yourself to over the years.
> >> Translation: I do not like pathetic stalkers who are given to sexual
> >> innuendo. Why not run this post past your wife and see what she thinks of
> >> it - and you?
> >> [...]
>
> > Answered the wife issue many times before. That discussion is
> > history , remember. Short-term memory loss is a terrible thing. As
> > for the rest ... boring, regurgitated copy and past boilerplate
> > because you can do no better. As for your translation of my
> > translation, I thought English was you primary language. Time for a
> > refresher.
>
> Hells Bells, I wouldn't show anyone what I have been writing on Usenet
> either if I were you. But your wife is going to divorce you any day now. I
> KNOW she is fed up with you just as the entire universe is. That is why she
> is getting a job on her own, so she can free herself from you.
You can't make up your mine now can you ... contradicting yourself
again and again??? You often state that you write for the whole
world, but also state that you wouldn't show anyon what you've have
been writing on Usenet and yet implore me to run posts past my wife
and see what she thinks. Are you just a little bit confused or
what???? Just as an indication of how little Ed really knows, my wife
has been gainfully employed for almost as long as Ed Dolan has NOT!.
Ed Dolan has never met my wife and know nothing about her or how she
thinks other than what I indicated here and she wants to hear nothing
more of or about the Minnesota loon. Opinion stated as fact is
Dolan's favorite tool and that's not pinion. That's fact. Lacking in
rationality, logic and powers of reason, Ed Dolan should not venture
into the arena of debate. To do so serves only to expose his
embarrassing ineptitude (read lack or knowledge, experience, and skill
to formulate and advance a convincing argument).
> >> Fucking Regards,
>
> >> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> >> aka
> >> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
the
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:0581afaa-45d7-4ea6...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 17, 2:39 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and what
> >> they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
>
> > So, you realized that you were volunteering for cleaning filthy
> > garbage pails and enduring field inspections? If so, why whine about
> > it? Unlike you, I recognize that adults, thinking that they know what
> > they are getting themselves into, are sometimes forced into make
> > choices between unappealing alternatives and, in different set of
> > circumstances, they would make altogether different decisions. By
> > your own admission, you volunteered for the Navy to avoid being
> > drafted into the Army. Now that I have provided you with a personal
> > example, perhaps you can now finally relate to what is an elementary
> > concept.
>
> I had heard about KP, but did not realize it went on forever in the Navy.
> But that is a characteristic of a draft military. They can afford to waste
> manpower because they have so much of it. I suspect when you were in Vietnam
> you did not spend all of your time cleaning things.
Of all the issues raised, you chose only to address KP. Why is that?
You have nothing to contribute regarding the rest? Well there was
my rifle to keep clean. Vietnam was a dirty place, dusty in the dry
Summer months and muddy in the wet Winter months, so there was much to
keep clean. For a stretch I worked intelligence in an underground
tactical operation center, where belief it or not (in a war-zone),
floors had to be washed and waxed daily for briefings ... sound Navy
enough for you? Military bullshit like the "policing" of cigarette
butts isn't disregarded, even in a war-zone
> >> >> But even in a draft military, it possible
> >> >> to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever end
> >> >> up
> >> >> in
> >> >> a war zone.
>
> >> > You know nothing of what you speak, but that has never stopped you
> >> > before. Where were you when the countless numbers were trying their
> >> > best to avoid a war-zone. Where were you then? Arrange? Care to
> >> > explain that? You volunteered for the Navy so as not to be drafted
> >> > and have a choice of branch of service, just like some volunteered in
> >> > an attempt to avoid a war-zone during war-time.
>
> >> All it takes is some minimum of brains. Too bad that lets you out.
>
> > A gratuitous insult is no substitute for reason and/or argument. Care
> > to take another (less diversionary) crack at it? I await your answer.
>
> It is merely bad luck that some end up in a war zone and manage to get
> themselves killed.
Granted, but you claimed that this was avoidable by choice.
> That is the price you pay for wanting to kill the enemy.
> You and I are not warriors.
You know little about me. If I am not a warrior, then why were you
compelled to provide my name to the police in the event that were to
die of suspicious circumstances?
Edward Dolan
> On Apr 18, 8:31 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:59f01595-f041-4224...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Apr 17, 2:39 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> Unlike you, I give adults credit for knowing what they are doing and
>> >> what
>> >> they are getting into when they volunteer for military service.
>>
>> > And what about what they are fleeing from that in some instances
>> > initiated the decision ... the flip-side of the equation? What do you
>> > not understand about people having to make difficult choices between
>> > two alternatives that they would rather not have to chose between
>> > given a different wet circumstances?
>>
>> Yes, yes ... life is full of difficult choices, but still we make them,
>> don't we?
>> [...]
>
> And your point is ... that you again missed the point??? The point is
> that not all who volunteer for the military really want to be in the
> military, but chose to join because alternatives were even less
> attractive and those of this mindset are not ideal candidates for your
> beloved "professional" military; and, it is not unreasonable to assume
> that their level of performance would be any better than those
> unwillingly conscripted. There, since it was obviously necessary to
> do so ... I spelled it out for you.
The fact is that they freely chose the military and not from fear of being
drafted either. Grunt infantry do not have to be overly smart, but I want
them to be killer-warriors.
JimmyMac probably even thinks Bob Hope was a comedian. His whole act was the
leering coward. Just how funny is that?
>> >> The Navy is a very tradition bound service, much more so than any of
>> >> the
>> >> other services, with the possible exception of the Marines.
>>
>> > This was not about tradition, but about shared common experiences in
>> > the military. You do have problems with focus, don't you?
>>
>> The Navy has a well deserved reputation for chicken shit. It is worse in
>> peacetime than in wartime.
>
> Since you didn't comprehend this the first go around ... This was not
> about tradition, but about shared common experiences in the military.
> You do have problems with focus, don't you?
It was and is about chicken shit - something that you have far less of in
times of war. See the movie "Apocalypse Now" for confirmation of this.
>> >> The culture has changed in the intervening years. Society overall is
>> >> more
>> >> rotten now than it ever was before.
>> >> [...]
>>
>> > Granted, but as I said before, standards of acceptance were once
>> > higher in the military than they are in your beloved volunteer
>> > professional military.
>>
>> Who cares if one has graduated from high school or not. It doesn't mean
>> anything anymore anyway. All that matters is that those who want to be in
>> the military should be given that opportunity. A nation of 300 million
>> does
>> not need to conscript.
>
> I never once mentioned level of education. How did you confuse level
> of education with lowered standards for acceptance (read waivers for
> past criminal record and known gang association). Stay focused and up
> to speed ... that is if you are capable).
Criminal gang types do not usually graduate from high school.
Those that wanted to be in
> the military were not prevented from enlisting during time of a
> conscripted military, or have you forgotten that? Need I remind you
> that you volunteered during a time when the draft was still active and
> by your own admission were an adult who know what he was in for?
> Consequently, you have no reason to bitch about the military tradition
> that you chose to become part of.
I have stated that I would rather have been in the military for 2 years
during wartime than 4 years during peacetime. I have also stated that a
professional all-volunteer military is a hundred times better than a
conscripted military. What do you take issue with?
>> >> >> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> fuck
>> >> >> up big time in order to earn a prison sentence in our society
>> >> >> today.
>>
>> >> > How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of anything? According
>> >> > to
>> >> > you way of thinking, If were to murder you, but never was caught and
>> >> > imprisoned, my offense would not be a serious one. Glad you set me
>> >> > straight on that.
>>
>> >> You would be caught right away because this correspondnece is being
>> >> preserved for all eternity by Google. I have also given your name to
>> >> the
>> >> local police. You would not enjoy our state prisons. Someone like Ed
>> >> Gin
>> >> would end up having you for his bitch.
>>
>> > I'll ask again ... How are those mistakenly imprisoned guilty of
>> > anything?
>>
>> I would rather see a few innocents go to prison than the guilty go free.
>> Some folks are just unlucky and there is nothing to be done about it.
>
> But that doesn't answer the question which was specifically asked
> because of your statement that prisons house only serious criminals,
> to which I countered that there are serious criminals roaming the
> streets and incarcerated innocents in prison.
It is all a question of numbers. Most serious criminals are in prison and
most innocents are roaming free in society.
>> > If I were you, I'd be concerned about much of what you have written
>> > being preserved for all eternity by Google. I do not live in fear of
>> > the police. The only crime I have committed here on Usenet is wasting
>> > my time on you ... now that's a crime. Besides it would likely go
>> > down like this ... one officer to another. Here he comes again ...
>> > Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows. Just humor
>> > the old fool. Take a report and then just shit can it. We've run out
>> > of room in our filing cabinets. Good that my break came at just the
>> > right time. He's all yours. I'm out of here.
>>
>> If I should die under suspicious circumstances, you can count on the
>> police
>> showing up on your doorstep with a few questions for you.
>> [...]
>
> No need, the grim reaper will sell to that soon. Your response is
> rather telling though. Apparently you live in fear of reprisal. That
> be the case, I presume you turned in lots more names, because you must
> surely be aware that I am only one among many whom you have endeared
> yourself to over the years.
Well, when someone talks about murder and me in the same sentence, I notify
the police. We have very good police detectives here and they take their
jobs seriously.
>> >> Translation: I do not like pathetic stalkers who are given to sexual
>> >> innuendo. Why not run this post past your wife and see what she thinks
>> >> of
>> >> it - and you?
>> >> [...]
>>
>> > Answered the wife issue many times before. That discussion is
>> > history , remember. Short-term memory loss is a terrible thing. As
>> > for the rest ... boring, regurgitated copy and past boilerplate
>> > because you can do no better. As for your translation of my
>> > translation, I thought English was you primary language. Time for a
>> > refresher.
>>
>> Hells Bells, I wouldn't show anyone what I have been writing on Usenet
>> either if I were you. But your wife is going to divorce you any day now.
>> I
>> KNOW she is fed up with you just as the entire universe is. That is why
>> she
>> is getting a job on her own, so she can free herself from you.
>
> You can't make up your mine now can you ... contradicting yourself
> again and again??? You often state that you write for the whole
> world, but also state that you wouldn't show anyon what you've have
> been writing on Usenet and yet implore me to run posts past my wife
> and see what she thinks. Are you just a little bit confused or
> what????
This thread died long ago. No one is reading any of it except for ourselves.
Just as an indication of how little Ed really knows, my wife
> has been gainfully employed for almost as long as Ed Dolan has NOT!.
> Ed Dolan has never met my wife and know nothing about her or how she
> thinks other than what I indicated here and she wants to hear nothing
> more of or about the Minnesota loon.
But I would like to hear what she thinks of you so I can determine if you
are both nuts or only you. I have a difficult time imagining you married at
all. You wife must be some kind of longsuffering martyr. I suggest you stay
on good terms with your dog as I KNOW she is going to leave you any day now.
Opinion stated as fact is
> Dolan's favorite tool and that's not pinion. That's fact. Lacking in
> rationality, logic and powers of reason, Ed Dolan should not venture
> into the arena of debate. To do so serves only to expose his
> embarrassing ineptitude (read lack or knowledge, experience, and skill
> to formulate and advance a convincing argument).
I am here merely to state my opinions and do not give a rat's ass about
debate.
Edward Dolan
But it was not full time cleaning, only occasional cleaning - and some of it
makes sense (like keeping your rifle cleaned). The Navy, especially in
peacetime, is renown for chicken shit cleaning. It is nothing but busy work
which makes no sense. I say fuck the Navy - at least in times of peace!
>> >> >> But even in a draft military, it possible
>> >> >> to arrange things so that it is highly unlikely that you will ever
>> >> >> end
>> >> >> up
>> >> >> in
>> >> >> a war zone.
>>
>> >> > You know nothing of what you speak, but that has never stopped you
>> >> > before. Where were you when the countless numbers were trying their
>> >> > best to avoid a war-zone. Where were you then? Arrange? Care to
>> >> > explain that? You volunteered for the Navy so as not to be drafted
>> >> > and have a choice of branch of service, just like some volunteered
>> >> > in
>> >> > an attempt to avoid a war-zone during war-time.
>>
>> >> All it takes is some minimum of brains. Too bad that lets you out.
>>
>> > A gratuitous insult is no substitute for reason and/or argument. Care
>> > to take another (less diversionary) crack at it? I await your answer.
>>
>> It is merely bad luck that some end up in a war zone and manage to get
>> themselves killed.
>
> Granted, but you claimed that this was avoidable by choice.
99% of the time it is. Did you not see the qualifier "highly unlikely"?
>> That is the price you pay for wanting to kill the enemy.
>> You and I are not warriors.
>
> You know little about me. If I am not a warrior, then why were you
> compelled to provide my name to the police in the event that you were to
> die of suspicious circumstances?
Because you are a crazy stalker and have a history of criminal acts
(misdemeanors only) according to Ed Gin. Your wife should be a wary of you
too by the way. There is something dreadfully wrong about anyone who would
stalk a perfect stranger on Usenet. Note how Tom Sherman and I disagree
about almost everything, yet he doesn't stalk me nor I him. That is normal
among adults without emotional or mental problems.
You act like a teenager who realizes for the first time in his life that not
everyone likes him. Get over it. I did not like you from the moment you
objected to taking advice on how to deal with Ed Gin. You know, that shit
about "I don't want to hear it. Don't write to me about it again."
Positively hysterical. Is that how you treat your wife too?
Since your wife is some kind of therapist, why not run the above two
paragraphs past her and see what she thinks.
JimmyMac
Diversion duly noted. Actually, the fact is that you have once again
failed to stay focused and address the issues raised, proving once
again that you are more interested in monologue than dialogue.
Diversion duly noted. I never found Bob Hope funny, but what does
that have to do with the issues raised? The only coward here it Ed
Dolan who continues to duck the issues. Then again what else can he
do when he is cornered with nothing to really offer ... except a
tangential diversion of course.
Dunderhead ... I repeat. I never mentioned education. You are
deliberately trying to side-track the issue raised that your beloved
professional military has lowered its standards for acceptance (is
less selective). Red-read what I wrote above. Can you really be this
dumb?
> Those that wanted to be in
>
> > the military were not prevented from enlisting during time of a
> > conscripted military, or have you forgotten that? Need I remind you
> > that you volunteered during a time when the draft was still active and
> > by your own admission were an adult who know what he was in for?
> > Consequently, you have no reason to bitch about the military tradition
> > that you chose to become part of.
>
> I have stated that I would rather have been in the military for 2 years
> during wartime than 4 years during peacetime. I have also stated that a
> professional all-volunteer military is a hundred times better than a
> conscripted military. What do you take issue with?
Since you asked, What ... your inability to saty focused and your
unwillingness to adress issues raiseD. For instance this reply like
most has nothing to to with the issued raised immediately above ...
specifically:
1. That those that wanted to be in the military were not prevented
from enlisting during time of a conscripted military making for a
hybrid military of both draftees and volunteers.
2. That you volunteered during a time when the draft was still active
and by your own admission and were an adult who know what he was in
for and consequently, you have no reason to bitch about the military
tradition that you chose to become part of.
> >> >> >> But those in prison are there for serious offences. You really have
That is a simplistic analysis from a simple mind. There are some
innocents incarcerated and even more that just "some" serious
criminals roaming the street, free to join your beloved professional
volunteer military and you seem not to recognize that.
> >> > If I were you, I'd be concerned about much of what you have written
> >> > being preserved for all eternity by Google. I do not live in fear of
> >> > the police. The only crime I have committed here on Usenet is wasting
> >> > my time on you ... now that's a crime. Besides it would likely go
> >> > down like this ... one officer to another. Here he comes again ...
> >> > Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows. Just humor
> >> > the old fool. Take a report and then just shit can it. We've run out
> >> > of room in our filing cabinets. Good that my break came at just the
> >> > right time. He's all yours. I'm out of here.
>
> >> If I should die under suspicious circumstances, you can count on the
> >> police
> >> showing up on your doorstep with a few questions for you.
> >> [...]
>
> > No need, the grim reaper will sell to that soon. Your response is
> > rather telling though. Apparently you live in fear of reprisal. That
> > be the case, I presume you turned in lots more names, because you must
> > surely be aware that I am only one among many whom you have endeared
> > yourself to over the years.
>
> Well, when someone talks about murder and me in the same sentence, I notify
> the police. We have very good police detectives here and they take their
> jobs seriously.
In the interest of fair play, I presume that you presented this thread
in evidence in its entirety. Undoubtedly the police will easily
recognize that which has escaped your poor powers of perception ...
that is, unlike you, they will be able to discern the difference
between an actual threat (assault) and the introduction of a
hypothetical scenario for the sake of argument to prove a point. That
begs the question, do you consider your many threats of others with
you trusty shotgun as something which should have been reported to the
police?
> >> >> Translation: I do not like pathetic stalkers who are given to sexual
> >> >> innuendo. Why not run this post past your wife and see what she thinks
> >> >> of
> >> >> it - and you?
> >> >> [...]
>
> >> > Answered the wife issue many times before. That discussion is
> >> > history , remember. Short-term memory loss is a terrible thing. As
> >> > for the rest ... boring, regurgitated copy and past boilerplate
> >> > because you can do no better. As for your translation of my
> >> > translation, I thought English was you primary language. Time for a
> >> > refresher.
>
> >> Hells Bells, I wouldn't show anyone what I have been writing on Usenet
> >> either if I were you. But your wife is going to divorce you any day now.
> >> I
> >> KNOW she is fed up with you just as the entire universe is. That is why
> >> she
> >> is getting a job on her own, so she can free herself from you.
>
> > You can't make up your mine now can you ... contradicting yourself
> > again and again??? You often state that you write for the whole
> > world, but also state that you wouldn't show anyon what you've have
> > been writing on Usenet and yet implore me to run posts past my wife
> > and see what she thinks. Are you just a little bit confused or
> > what????
>
> This thread died long ago. No one is reading any of it except for ourselves.
Whether that be true or not, the fact remains that you again did not
address any of the issues raised immediately above. The reason this
thread is nearly dead is because you are selfishly interested in
monologue rather than dialogue.
> Just as an indication of how little Ed really knows, my wife
>
> > has been gainfully employed for almost as long as Ed Dolan has NOT!.
> > Ed Dolan has never met my wife and know nothing about her or how she
> > thinks other than what I indicated here and she wants to hear nothing
> > more of or about the Minnesota loon.
>
> But I would like to hear what she thinks of you so I can determine if you
> are both nuts or only you. I have a difficult time imagining you married at
> all. You wife must be some kind of longsuffering martyr. I suggest you stay
> on good terms with your dog as I KNOW she is going to leave you any day now.
All of the above has been previously addressed numerous time and yet
is regurgitated here by the one who asserts that I continuer to dray
this on. Yep just about to end this one like I did the last. I see
little point in continuing just because Ed wants me to.
> Opinion stated as fact is
>
> > Dolan's favorite tool and that's not pinion. That's fact. Lacking in
> > rationality, logic and powers of reason, Ed Dolan should not venture
> > into the arena of debate. To do so serves only to expose his
> > embarrassing ineptitude (read lack or knowledge, experience, and skill
> > to formulate and advance a convincing argument).
>
> I am here merely to state my opinions and do not give a rat's ass about
> debate.
Just as well because your debating skills are virtually non-existent.
JimmyMac
I'm still waiting to hear the magic formula, especially once
conscripted.
> >> That is the price you pay for wanting to kill the enemy.
> >> You and I are not warriors.
>
> > You know little about me. If I am not a warrior, then why were you
> > compelled to provide my name to the police in the event that you were to
> > die of suspicious circumstances?
>
> Because you are a crazy stalker
You deliberately troll for adversaries in quest for a cyber-skirmish.
You love the attention until it becomes too intensely focused . When
you encounter an adversary too tenacious, too formidable, who is every
bit as stubborn and determined as you, the whining ensues. You find
yourself hopelessly embroiled in a cyber-skirmish that you desperately
want out of. You move to disencumber yourself by seeking to discredit
and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This
thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless times. Face it.
you are your own worst enemy ... a victim of a self-inflicted
dilemma.
> and have a history of criminal acts (misdemeanors only) according to Ed Gin.
You refer to Ed Gin as a criminal and yet cite him as a reference to
discredit me? Now, thats incongruous. "History"??? That is
deliberately taking the liberty and license to employ an inappropriate
word with known obvious implications, but you never have exhibited a
willingness to play fairly. Like I said before. You no nothing of
me.
> Your wife should be a wary of you too by the way.
I'll pass that on. I'm sure that she values you opinion ... NOT!!!
As you will recall, my wife is no longer part an parcel of this
discussion. You mention of her was inappropriate from the get go.
> There is something dreadfully wrong about anyone who would
> stalk a perfect stranger on Usenet.
You're a stranger for sure. I have never encountered anyone stranger,
but PERFECT???? Don't flatter yourself!
> Note how Tom Sherman and I disagree
> about almost everything, yet he doesn't stalk me nor I him. That is normal
> among adults without emotional or mental problems.
Tom may not stalk you, but I you certainly have stalked him at times.
You can't possibly be objective about what yourself and what you do.
What woudl you know about being withoug emotion or mental problems?
Emotional and mental problems you personify, but those who read this
are already well aware of that.
> You act like a teenager who realizes for the first time in his life that not
> everyone likes him. Get over it.
Opinion stated as fact.
> I did not like you from the moment you
> objected to taking advice on how to deal with Ed Gin.
And I'm acting like a teenager? When some simply disagrees with you,
that is and of itself reason to dislike them? Well this should serve
as an insightful glimpse into your psyche.
> You know, that shit
> about "I don't want to hear it. Don't write to me about it again."
This was said ONLY after you had regurgitated your advice over and
over and over ad nauseum (as you are prone to do). You adamantly
refused to accept that I did not ask for your advice, did not require
your advice and when politely asked to refrain, you persisted. As is
customary, you refused to respect my wishes assuming that you knew
better ... hell bent upon imposing your will, proving that this was
more about you than it ever was about me and Ed Gin.
> Positively hysterical. Is that how you treat your wife too?
Opinion stated by fact followed by a leading question. This is not
about hysteria not about my wife and our relationship is none of your
concern nor is it any of your business.
> Since your wife is some kind of therapist, why not run the above two
> paragraphs past her and see what she thinks.
This is the final time I will state this. I hope it gets through that
thick head of yours. My wife has indicated that she wants to hear
nothing more of you or about you. It didn't take her long to make the
right call where you ar concerned.
I have to wonder, just how many friends do you have? How many have
you ever had? How many successful interpersonal relationships have
you ever had of any significant duration? How many were with women?
Edward Dolan
>> I have stated that I would rather have been in the military for 2 years
>> during wartime than 4 years during peacetime. I have also stated that a
>> professional all-volunteer military is a hundred times better than a
>> conscripted military. What do you take issue with?
>
> Since you asked, What ... your inability to saty focused and your
> unwillingness to adress issues raiseD. For instance this reply like
> most has nothing to to with the issued raised immediately above ...
> specifically:
>
> 1. That those that wanted to be in the military were not prevented
> from enlisting during time of a conscripted military making for a
> hybrid military of both draftees and volunteers.
> 2. That you volunteered during a time when the draft was still active
> and by your own admission and were an adult who know what he was in
> for and consequently, you have no reason to bitch about the military
> tradition that you chose to become part of.
My statement above was what this thread was all about initially. You are the
one who wanders off course because you are unable to distinguish between
statements that matter and those that don't. You are unable to make
discriminations. All things are equal with you.
We are both into monologues. No dialogue is possible. You want to debate and
all I want to do is state my opinions. It is a take it or leave it
proposition as far as I am concerned. Tom Sherman learned this many years
ago. I have no more interest in debating him than he does me. Take the cue
why don't you!
[...]
>> Well, when someone talks about murder and me in the same sentence, I
>> notify
>> the police. We have very good police detectives here and they take their
>> jobs seriously.
>
> In the interest of fair play, I presume that you presented this thread
> in evidence in its entirety. Undoubtedly the police will easily
> recognize that which has escaped your poor powers of perception ...
> that is, unlike you, they will be able to discern the difference
> between an actual threat (assault) and the introduction of a
> hypothetical scenario for the sake of argument to prove a point. That
> begs the question, do you consider your many threats of others with
> you trusty shotgun as something which should have been reported to the
> police?
Google is preserving everything so there is no need to involve the police
anymore than they need to be involved.
[...]
>> I am here merely to state my opinions and do not give a rat's ass about
>> debate.
>
> Just as well because your debating skills are virtually non-existent.
No one will debate you because you are so tiresome.
Edward Dolan
>> Because you are a crazy stalker
>
> You deliberately troll for adversaries in quest for a cyber-skirmish.
> You love the attention until it becomes too intensely focused . When
> you encounter an adversary too tenacious, too formidable, who is every
> bit as stubborn and determined as you, the whining ensues. You find
> yourself hopelessly embroiled in a cyber-skirmish that you desperately
> want out of. You move to disencumber yourself by seeking to discredit
> and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This
> thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless times. Face it.
> you are your own worst enemy ... a victim of a self-inflicted
> dilemma.
Nope, I don't give a damn about trolls or any of that nonsense. I simply
state my opinions and let the chips fall where they may. You have never been
able to figure out what Usenet is for. It is for fun and games. That is all
it is for.
[...]
>> Note how Tom Sherman and I disagree
>> about almost everything, yet he doesn't stalk me nor I him. That is
>> normal
>> among adults without emotional or mental problems.
>
> Tom may not stalk you, but I you certainly have stalked him at times.
> You can't possibly be objective about what yourself and what you do.
> What woudl you know about being withoug emotion or mental problems?
> Emotional and mental problems you personify, but those who read this
> are already well aware of that.
You need to ask Tom Sherman if I have ever stalked him like you have me. Tom
Sherman, unlike you, has some perspective on Usenet.
[...]
>> You know, that shit
>> about "I don't want to hear it. Don't write to me about it again."
>
> This was said ONLY after you had regurgitated your advice over and
> over and over ad nauseum (as you are prone to do). You adamantly
> refused to accept that I did not ask for your advice, did not require
> your advice and when politely asked to refrain, you persisted. As is
> customary, you refused to respect my wishes assuming that you knew
> better ... hell bent upon imposing your will, proving that this was
> more about you than it ever was about me and Ed Gin.
But I did know better. If and when you do not like advice, then just ignore
it, but don't tell others what to say or not to say to you. Who the hell do
you think you are to do that anyway? Is that how you treat your wife?
[...]
> I have to wonder, just how many friends do you have? How many have
> you ever had? How many successful interpersonal relationships have
> you ever had of any significant duration? How many were with women?
The Great Ed Dolan must always remain mystery to the likes of JimmyMac. That
is as it should be. After all, he is ordinary and Ed Dolan the Great is
extraordinary.
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2244788b-9303-43e8...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 21, 7:29 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> I have stated that I would rather have been in the military for 2 years
> >> during wartime than 4 years during peacetime. I have also stated that a
> >> professional all-volunteer military is a hundred times better than a
> >> conscripted military. What do you take issue with?
>
> > unwillingness to address issues raised. For instance this reply like
> > most has nothing to to with the issued raised immediately above ...
> > specifically:
>
> > 1. That those that wanted to be in the military were not prevented
> > from enlisting during time of a conscripted military making for a
> > hybrid military of both draftees and volunteers.
> > 2. That you volunteered during a time when the draft was still active
> > and by your own admission and were an adult who know what he was in
> > for and consequently, you have no reason to bitch about the military
> > tradition that you chose to become part of.
>
> My statement above was what this thread was all about initially. You are the
> one who wanders off course because you are unable to distinguish between
> statements that matter and those that don't. You are unable to make
> discriminations. All things are equal with you.
Faile to do so again. Thanks for mking my point. iYour statement
above was not what this thread was all about. It started out with
Harry Brogan indicating that he had painted his Bob trailer and
characteristically you diverted the conversation into a political
topic of your liking by objecting to the color scheme, stating ... You
should have painted it red, white and blue in memory of all those
MIA's from the Korean and Vietnam Wars.
Your "All things are equal" remark is so perplexing as to incite
hysterical laughter precisely because the assertion originates from
you ... an well-established myopic "visionary". Wander of course you
say? I reply to your questions and comments (even some of you
diversionary tangents) whereas you deliberately fail to do so even
when I repeatedly point out that you have failed to respond with
obvious intent to undermine any possibility of dialog when you are
uncomfortable with the direction it has taken, employing diversion in
an effort to unencumber yourself from issues raised.
> We are both into monologues. No dialogue is possible. You want to debate and
> all I want to do is state my opinions. It is a take it or leave it
> proposition as far as I am concerned.
Debate is dialogue. "Take it or leave it" opinion" is monologue.
Thanks for making my point.
> Tom Sherman learned this many years
> ago. I have no more interest in debating him than he does me. Take the cue
> why don't you!
Now why do you suppose that is? Well, because Tom undoubtedly
realizes that you are, as you have indicate in the past, all about
opinion (monologue) and refuse to debate an issue (engage in
dialogue). What are you afraid of other than being made out to be
wrong? In a recent post, Tom indicated that you are wrong about most
things. He's right of course.
> >> Well, when someone talks about murder and me in the same sentence, I
> >> notify
> >> the police. We have very good police detectives here and they take their
> >> jobs seriously.
>
> > In the interest of fair play, I presume that you presented this thread
> > in evidence in its entirety. Undoubtedly the police will easily
> > recognize that which has escaped your poor powers of perception ...
> > that is, unlike you, they will be able to discern the difference
> > between an actual threat (assault) and the introduction of a
> > hypothetical scenario for the sake of argument to prove a point. That
> > begs the question, do you consider your many threats of others with
> > you trusty shotgun as something which should have been reported to the
> > police?
>
> Google is preserving everything so there is no need to involve the police
> anymore than they need to be involved.
> [...]
>
> >> I am here merely to state my opinions and do not give a rat's ass about
> >> debate.
>
> > Just as well, because your debating skills are virtually non-existent.
>
> No one will debate you because you are so tiresome.
You won't because you would find yourself disadvantage by ineptitude.
Regurgitation of your time-worn opinions is a poor substitute for
argument. Rpetitious monologue does not constitute dialogue. You are
tedium in the extreme. I guess you forgot that Tom Sherman, one whom
you hold in high regard (when you aren't insulting him that is), and I
had quite a debate going sometime back.
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ee41fc61-0f3c-4099...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 21, 8:02 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> Because you are a crazy stalker
>
> > You deliberately troll for adversaries in quest for a cyber-skirmish.
> > You love the attention until it becomes too intensely focused . When
> > you encounter an adversary too tenacious, too formidable, who is every
> > bit as stubborn and determined as you, the whining ensues. You find
> > yourself hopelessly embroiled in a cyber-skirmish that you desperately
> > want out of. You move to disencumber yourself by seeking to discredit
> > and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This
> > thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless times. Face it.
> > you are your own worst enemy ... a victim of a self-inflicted
> > dilemma.
>
> Nope, I don't give a damn about trolls or any of that nonsense.
Labeling a premise or concept as nonsense, does not undermine its
validity. You don't give a damn about trolls? I rather enjoyed your
unintentional self-deprecation.
>I simply
> state my opinions and let the chips fall where they may.
Yeah we all know that it is all about you and only about you.
>You have never been
> able to figure out what Usenet is for. It is for fun and games. That is all
> it is for.
Opinion stated as fact. When it comes to the what Usenet is about and
the reason it cam into being , you suffer from clue defficiency
disorder. Usenet is merely a showcase for your unharnessed ego which
fills a social void. You live socially detached in reclusive
solitude, devoid of real-life interpersonal relationships. Absorbed
in your own wayward drama, Usenet has become your cyberspace playpen
and serves as ersatz social interaction that only momentarily disrupts
his otherwise self-sequestered isolation. From Usenet, you garners a
twisted sense of accomplishment and self-esteem. Without the
lifeblood of the Usenet newsgroup audience to sustain you, your very
existence would be meaningless and empty. What kind of pathetic,
shallow existence is that?
> >> Note how Tom Sherman and I disagree
> >> about almost everything, yet he doesn't stalk me nor I him. That is
> >> normal
> >> among adults without emotional or mental problems.
>
> > Tom may not stalk you, but I you certainly have stalked him at times.
> > You can't possibly be objective about what yourself and what you do.
> > What woudl you know about being withoug emotion or mental problems?
> > Emotional and mental problems you personify, but those who read this
> > are already well aware of that.
>
> You need to ask Tom Sherman if I have ever stalked him like you have me. Tom
> Sherman, unlike you, has some perspective on Usenet.
> [...]
>
> >> You know, that shit
> >> about "I don't want to hear it. Don't write to me about it again."
>
> > This was said ONLY after you had regurgitated your advice over and
> > over and over ad nauseum (as you are prone to do). You adamantly
> > refused to accept that I did not ask for your advice, did not require
> > your advice and when politely asked to refrain, you persisted. As is
> > customary, you refused to respect my wishes assuming that you knew
> > better ... hell bent upon imposing your will, proving that this was
> > more about you than it ever was about me and Ed Gin.
>
> But I did know better. If and when you do not like advice, then just ignore
> it, but don't tell others what to say or not to say to you. Who the hell do
> you think you are to do that anyway? Is that how you treat your wife?
I certainly tried to ignore your advice but you were relentless,
harping and harping in a concerted effort to ensure that I not ignore
your advice. Most rational people when told that their advice is not
required, get the message. You don't, because you are not rational.
If you want to be heard you must first learn to listen and you turn a
deaf ear to others, and yet castigate those who would do the same to
you. What do you not understand about all this?
> > I have to wonder, just how many friends do you have? How many have
> > you ever had? How many successful interpersonal relationships have
> > you ever had of any significant duration? How many were with women?
>
> The Great Ed Dolan must always remain mystery to the likes of JimmyMac. That
> is as it should be. After all, he is ordinary and Ed Dolan the Great is
> extraordinary.
I fully expected this predictable diversionary reply, because the
answers are painfully obvious and reveal much about you the person.
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ee41fc61-0f3c-4099...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 21, 8:02 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> Because you are a crazy stalker
>
> > You deliberately troll for adversaries in quest for a cyber-skirmish.
> > You love the attention until it becomes too intensely focused . When
> > you encounter an adversary too tenacious, too formidable, who is every
> > bit as stubborn and determined as you, the whining ensues. You find
> > yourself hopelessly embroiled in a cyber-skirmish that you desperately
> > want out of. You move to disencumber yourself by seeking to discredit
> > and dismiss your adversary by labeling him or her as a stalker. This
> > thinly disguised ploy of yours has failed countless times. Face it.
> > you are your own worst enemy ... a victim of a self-inflicted
> > dilemma.
>
> Nope, I don't give a damn about trolls or any of that nonsense.
Labeling a premise or concept as nonsense, does not undermine its
validity. You don't give a damn about trolls? I rather enjoyed your
unintentional self-deprecation.
>I simply
> state my opinions and let the chips fall where they may.
Yeah we all know that it is all about you and only about you.
>You have never been
> able to figure out what Usenet is for. It is for fun and games. That is all
> it is for.
Opinion stated as fact. When it comes to the what Usenet is about and
the reason it cam into being , you suffer from clue defficiency
disorder. Usenet is merely a showcase for your unharnessed ego which
fills a social void. You live socially detached in reclusive
solitude, devoid of real-life interpersonal relationships. Absorbed
in your own wayward drama, Usenet has become your cyberspace playpen
and serves as ersatz social interaction that only momentarily disrupts
his otherwise self-sequestered isolation. From Usenet, you garners a
twisted sense of accomplishment and self-esteem. Without the
lifeblood of the Usenet newsgroup audience to sustain you, your very
existence would be meaningless and empty. What kind of pathetic,
shallow existence is that?
> >> Note how Tom Sherman and I disagree
> >> about almost everything, yet he doesn't stalk me nor I him. That is
> >> normal
> >> among adults without emotional or mental problems.
>
> > Tom may not stalk you, but I you certainly have stalked him at times.
> > You can't possibly be objective about what yourself and what you do.
> > What woudl you know about being withoug emotion or mental problems?
> > Emotional and mental problems you personify, but those who read this
> > are already well aware of that.
>
> You need to ask Tom Sherman if I have ever stalked him like you have me. Tom
> Sherman, unlike you, has some perspective on Usenet.
> [...]
>
> >> You know, that shit
> >> about "I don't want to hear it. Don't write to me about it again."
>
> > This was said ONLY after you had regurgitated your advice over and
> > over and over ad nauseum (as you are prone to do). You adamantly
> > refused to accept that I did not ask for your advice, did not require
> > your advice and when politely asked to refrain, you persisted. As is
> > customary, you refused to respect my wishes assuming that you knew
> > better ... hell bent upon imposing your will, proving that this was
> > more about you than it ever was about me and Ed Gin.
>
> But I did know better. If and when you do not like advice, then just ignore
> it, but don't tell others what to say or not to say to you. Who the hell do
> you think you are to do that anyway? Is that how you treat your wife?
I certainly tried to ignore your advice but you were relentless,
harping and harping in a concerted effort to ensure that I not ignore
your advice. Most rational people when told that their advice is not
required, get the message. You don't, because you are not rational.
If you want to be heard you must first learn to listen and you turn a
deaf ear to others, and yet castigate those who would do the same to
you. What do you not understand about all this?
> > I have to wonder, just how many friends do you have? How many have
> > you ever had? How many successful interpersonal relationships have
> > you ever had of any significant duration? How many were with women?
>
> The Great Ed Dolan must always remain mystery to the likes of JimmyMac. That
> is as it should be. After all, he is ordinary and Ed Dolan the Great is
> extraordinary.
I fully expected this predictable diversionary reply, because the
answers are painfully obvious and reveal much about you the person.
> >> Regards,
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2244788b-9303-43e8...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 21, 7:29 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> I have stated that I would rather have been in the military for 2 years
> >> during wartime than 4 years during peacetime. I have also stated that a
> >> professional all-volunteer military is a hundred times better than a
> >> conscripted military. What do you take issue with?
>
> > unwillingness to address issues raised. For instance this reply like
> > most has nothing to to with the issued raised immediately above ...
> > specifically:
>
> > 1. That those that wanted to be in the military were not prevented
> > from enlisting during time of a conscripted military making for a
> > hybrid military of both draftees and volunteers.
> > 2. That you volunteered during a time when the draft was still active
> > and by your own admission and were an adult who know what he was in
> > for and consequently, you have no reason to bitch about the military
> > tradition that you chose to become part of.
>
> My statement above was what this thread was all about initially. You are the
> one who wanders off course because you are unable to distinguish between
> statements that matter and those that don't. You are unable to make
> discriminations. All things are equal with you.
Faile to do so again. Thanks for mking my point. iYour statement
above was not what this thread was all about. It started out with
Harry Brogan indicating that he had painted his Bob trailer and
characteristically you diverted the conversation into a political
topic of your liking by objecting to the color scheme, stating ... You
should have painted it red, white and blue in memory of all those
MIA's from the Korean and Vietnam Wars.
Your "All things are equal" remark is so perplexing as to incite
hysterical laughter precisely because the assertion originates from
you ... an well-established myopic "visionary". Wander of course you
say? I reply to your questions and comments (even some of you
diversionary tangents) whereas you deliberately fail to do so even
when I repeatedly point out that you have failed to respond with
obvious intent to undermine any possibility of dialog when you are
uncomfortable with the direction it has taken, employing diversion in
an effort to unencumber yourself from issues raised.
> We are both into monologues. No dialogue is possible. You want to debate and
> all I want to do is state my opinions. It is a take it or leave it
> proposition as far as I am concerned.
Debate is dialogue. "Take it or leave it" opinion" is monologue.
Thanks for making my point.
> Tom Sherman learned this many years
> ago. I have no more interest in debating him than he does me. Take the cue
> why don't you!
Now why do you suppose that is? Well, because Tom undoubtedly
realizes that you are, as you have indicate in the past, all about
opinion (monologue) and refuse to debate an issue (engage in
dialogue). What are you afraid of other than being made out to be
wrong? In a recent post, Tom indicated that you are wrong about most
things. He's right of course.
> >> Well, when someone talks about murder and me in the same sentence, I
> >> notify
> >> the police. We have very good police detectives here and they take their
> >> jobs seriously.
>
> > In the interest of fair play, I presume that you presented this thread
> > in evidence in its entirety. Undoubtedly the police will easily
> > recognize that which has escaped your poor powers of perception ...
> > that is, unlike you, they will be able to discern the difference
> > between an actual threat (assault) and the introduction of a
> > hypothetical scenario for the sake of argument to prove a point. That
> > begs the question, do you consider your many threats of others with
> > you trusty shotgun as something which should have been reported to the
> > police?
>
> Google is preserving everything so there is no need to involve the police
> anymore than they need to be involved.
> [...]
>
> >> I am here merely to state my opinions and do not give a rat's ass about
> >> debate.
>
> > Just as well, because your debating skills are virtually non-existent.
>
> No one will debate you because you are so tiresome.
You won't because you would find yourself disadvantage by ineptitude.
Regurgitation of your time-worn opinions is a poor substitute for
argument. Rpetitious monologue does not constitute dialogue. You are
tedium in the extreme. I guess you forgot that Tom Sherman, one whom
you hold in high regard (when you aren't insulting him that is), and I
had quite a debate going sometime back.
> Regards,
Edward Dolan
>> We are both into monologues. No dialogue is possible. You want to debate
>> and
>> all I want to do is state my opinions. It is a take it or leave it
>> proposition as far as I am concerned.
>
> Debate is dialogue. "Take it or leave it" opinion" is monologue.
> Thanks for making my point.
I think he is finally starting to get it!
>> Tom Sherman learned this many years
>> ago. I have no more interest in debating him than he does me. Take the
>> cue
>> why don't you!
>
> Now why do you suppose that is? Well, because Tom undoubtedly
> realizes that you are, as you have indicate in the past, all about
> opinion (monologue) and refuse to debate an issue (engage in
> dialogue). What are you afraid of other than being made out to be
> wrong? In a recent post, Tom indicated that you are wrong about most
> things. He's right of course.
Tom Sherman has never been right about anything in his life. He is a
liberal-socialist-communist. He is also a Palestinian terrorist sympathizer.
He is probably going to vote for the Black Man this November if he gets a
chance. Just how wrong can one get.
[...]
>> >> I am here merely to state my opinions and do not give a rat's ass
>> >> about
>> >> debate.
>>
>> > Just as well, because your debating skills are virtually non-existent.
>>
>> No one will debate you because you are so tiresome.
>
> You won't because you would find yourself disadvantage by ineptitude.
> Regurgitation of your time-worn opinions is a poor substitute for
> argument. Rpetitious monologue does not constitute dialogue. You are
> tedium in the extreme. I guess you forgot that Tom Sherman, one whom
> you hold in high regard (when you aren't insulting him that is), and I
> had quite a debate going sometime back.
You confuse arguing and whining with debate. You exasperated him just as you
do everyone else, even Ed Gin! But I do not debate because I don't want to
be bothered with facts. I am here for opinion only. I leave it to others
less endowed than myself to supply any needed facts.
Edward Dolan
> >You have never been
>> able to figure out what Usenet is for. It is for fun and games. That is
>> all
>> it is for.
>
> Opinion stated as fact. When it comes to the what Usenet is about and
> the reason it cam into being , you suffer from clue defficiency
> disorder. Usenet is merely a showcase for your unharnessed ego which
> fills a social void. You live socially detached in reclusive
> solitude, devoid of real-life interpersonal relationships. Absorbed
> in your own wayward drama, Usenet has become your cyberspace playpen
> and serves as ersatz social interaction that only momentarily disrupts
> his otherwise self-sequestered isolation. From Usenet, you garners a
> twisted sense of accomplishment and self-esteem. Without the
> lifeblood of the Usenet newsgroup audience to sustain you, your very
> existence would be meaningless and empty. What kind of pathetic,
> shallow existence is that?
A group must be moderated. If it isn't, then it is just a playground for
fools like you and me.
[...]
>> But I did know better. If and when you do not like advice, then just
>> ignore
>> it, but don't tell others what to say or not to say to you. Who the hell
>> do
>> you think you are to do that anyway? Is that how you treat your wife?
>
> I certainly tried to ignore your advice but you were relentless,
> harping and harping in a concerted effort to ensure that I not ignore
> your advice. Most rational people when told that their advice is not
> required, get the message. You don't, because you are not rational.
> If you want to be heard you must first learn to listen and you turn a
> deaf ear to others, and yet castigate those who would do the same to
> you. What do you not understand about all this?
Never tell others what they can say to you and what they cannot say to you.
That is not in your control. It is a sign of insanity.
[...]
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ce411889-da52-402b...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 24, 5:12 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> We are both into monologues. No dialogue is possible. You want to debate
> >> and
> >> all I want to do is state my opinions. It is a take it or leave it
> >> proposition as far as I am concerned.
>
> > Debate is dialogue. "Take it or leave it" opinion is monologue.
> > Thanks for making my point.
>
> I think he is finally starting to get it!
Yep. I get that you don't get it ... that dialogue is requred for
give an tak and all you car about is giving you opinion to those who
dont' value you opinion or advice. That discourage you thogh from
offer what you consider as sound advice and other consider 99% sound
and 1% advice. I'm not starting to get it. I've know this all along.
> >> Tom Sherman learned this many years
> >> ago. I have no more interest in debating him than he does me. Take the
> >> cue
> >> why don't you!
>
> > Now why do you suppose that is? Well, because Tom undoubtedly
> > realizes that you are, as you have indicate in the past, all about
> > opinion (monologue) and refuse to debate an issue (engage in
> > dialogue). What are you afraid of other than being made out to be
> > wrong? In a recent post, Tom indicated that you are wrong about most
> > things. He's right of course.
>
> Tom Sherman has never been right about anything in his life. He is a
> liberal-socialist-communist. He is also a Palestinian terrorist sympathizer.
> He is probably going to vote for the Black Man this November if he gets a
> chance. Just how wrong can one get.
> [...]
Well, there is no point in engaging Tom Sherman in a debate the either
since you have already predetermined that he is wrong headed about
everything, effectively precluding any possibility of dialogue. The
interesting thing is that this is a common theme of your. You seem to
thinkg that only you have a handle on things when in reality you are
the common denominator the antagonist with whom only one agrees
(M.V.)
> >> >> I am here merely to state my opinions and do not give a rat's ass
> >> >> about
> >> >> debate.
>
> >> > Just as well, because your debating skills are virtually non-existent.
>
> >> No one will debate you because you are so tiresome.
>
> > You won't because you would find yourself disadvantage by ineptitude.
> > Regurgitation of your time-worn opinions is a poor substitute for
> > argument. Repetitious monologue does not constitute dialogue. You are
> > tedium in the extreme. I guess you forgot that Tom Sherman, one whom
> > you hold in high regard (when you aren't insulting him that is), and I
> > had quite a debate going sometime back.
>
> You confuse arguing and whining with debate. You exasperated him just as you
> do everyone else, even Ed Gin! But I do not debate because I don't want to
> be bothered with facts. I am here for opinion only. I leave it to others
> less endowed than myself to supply any needed facts.
I haven't exasperated you, have I? Argument is inherent to debate.
Debate is a discussion in which opposing arguments and reasons are
advanced for and against particulars such as values, policies,
proposals, propositions or concepts. You don't debate because you
don't know how. You've not mastered the art and would rather not risk
looking foolish. You have never been able to discern the distinction
between fact and opinion. You claim to be uninterested in facts and
are all about opinion, well then why not engage in debate? I thought
you relished a good scrap ... maybe just with inferiors whom you can
more readily win out over? You merely state an opinion without
entering into debate concerning an opinion. Consequently you engage
only in monologue rather than dialogue. How boring is that?
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:0b9949e7-1061-42d5...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 24, 5:29 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> > >You have never been
> >> able to figure out what Usenet is for. It is for fun and games. That is
> >> all
> >> it is for.
>
> > Opinion stated as fact. When it comes to the what Usenet is about and
> > the reason it cam into being , you suffer from clue defficiency
> > disorder. Usenet is merely a showcase for your unharnessed ego which
> > fills a social void. You live socially detached in reclusive
> > solitude, devoid of real-life interpersonal relationships. Absorbed
> > in your own wayward drama, Usenet has become your cyberspace playpen
> > and serves as ersatz social interaction that only momentarily disrupts
> > his otherwise self-sequestered isolation. From Usenet, you garners a
> > twisted sense of accomplishment and self-esteem. Without the
> > lifeblood of the Usenet newsgroup audience to sustain you, your very
> > existence would be meaningless and empty. What kind of pathetic,
> > shallow existence is that?
>
> A group must be moderated. If it isn't, then it is just a playground for
> fools like you and me.
> [...]
Do not lump me into the same category as you. We are nothing alike
you and I, and only one of us is a fool and that would be you.
> >> But I did know better. If and when you do not like advice, then just
> >> ignore
> >> it, but don't tell others what to say or not to say to you. Who the hell
> >> do
> >> you think you are to do that anyway? Is that how you treat your wife?
>
> > I certainly tried to ignore your advice but you were relentless,
> > harping and harping in a concerted effort to ensure that I not ignore
> > your advice. Most rational people when told that their advice is not
> > required, get the message. You don't, because you are not rational.
> > If you want to be heard you must first learn to listen and you turn a
> > deaf ear to others, and yet castigate those who would do the same to
> > you. What do you not understand about all this?
>
> Never tell others what they can say to you and what they cannot say to you.
> That is not in your control. It is a sign of insanity.
> [...]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what you just did in making
that statement? You just told me what I cannot say to you. The
conundrum continues. Well, you just gotta love self-incrimination.
By his own criteria, Ed Dolan just annointed himself ... insane; and,
it is about time that he finally admitted what most of us already
knew. What is really insane is Ed Dolan's deliberate and concerted
effort to impose his opinion and will upon me in an attempt to
manipulate and control how I interacted with Ed Gin. Is this not
insane?
Edward Dolan
> On Apr 24, 3:11 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:ce411889-da52-402b...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Apr 24, 5:12 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> We are both into monologues. No dialogue is possible. You want to
>> >> debate
>> >> and
>> >> all I want to do is state my opinions. It is a take it or leave it
>> >> proposition as far as I am concerned.
>>
>> > Debate is dialogue. "Take it or leave it" opinion is monologue.
>> > Thanks for making my point.
>>
>> I think he is finally starting to get it!
>
> Yep. I get that you don't get it ... that dialogue is requred for
> give an tak and all you car about is giving you opinion to those who
> dont' value you opinion or advice. That discourage you thogh from
> offer what you consider as sound advice and other consider 99% sound
> and 1% advice. I'm not starting to get it. I've know this all along.
Yup ... I am all about opinion and nothing else. Now go and sin no more! Say
100 Our Fathers and 1000 Hail Marys for your penance.
>> >> Tom Sherman learned this many years
>> >> ago. I have no more interest in debating him than he does me. Take the
>> >> cue
>> >> why don't you!
>>
>> > Now why do you suppose that is? Well, because Tom undoubtedly
>> > realizes that you are, as you have indicate in the past, all about
>> > opinion (monologue) and refuse to debate an issue (engage in
>> > dialogue). What are you afraid of other than being made out to be
>> > wrong? In a recent post, Tom indicated that you are wrong about most
>> > things. He's right of course.
>>
>> Tom Sherman has never been right about anything in his life. He is a
>> liberal-socialist-communist. He is also a Palestinian terrorist
>> sympathizer.
>> He is probably going to vote for the Black Man this November if he gets a
>> chance. Just how wrong can one get.
>> [...]
>
> Well, there is no point in engaging Tom Sherman in a debate the either
> since you have already predetermined that he is wrong headed about
> everything, effectively precluding any possibility of dialogue. The
> interesting thing is that this is a common theme of your. You seem to
> thinkg that only you have a handle on things when in reality you are
> the common denominator the antagonist with whom only one agrees
> (M.V.)
I am not interested in debating anyone! I never have been and I never will
be. Why? Because I know what I know and I don't give a good god damn what
anyone else thinks about anything. Clear enough for you?
"I am not interested in debating anyone! I never have been and I never will
be. Why? Because I know what I know and I don't give a good god damn what
anyone else thinks about anything. Clear enough for you?" - Ed Dolan
Edward Dolan
You are by far a bigger fool than I am because I know what I am doing here
and you don't. I am here for fun and games. Why are you here?
No one in this world cared how you interacted with the criminal vandal troll
Ed Gin, but you did it on Usenet where the rest of us had to witness your
disgrace. It was embarrassing - the gorilla vs. the monkey! Ed Gin made a
fool out of you just as I am doing. A fool that cannot learn from his
mistakes is indeed a fool!
The bottom line is that you never know what the hell you are doing on
Usenet. Ed Gin at least knew what he was doing and so do I.
JimmyMac
debate because you've not mastered the art and realize that you would
fail miserably if you were to make the attempt against a worth
adversary (almost anyone, really). In answer to your question (unlike
you I respond to questions ... that's called dialogue and courtesy),
Yes, things are more than clear enough. It is all about you. Since
you don't give a good god damn (thought you were a self-proclaimed
atheist) what anyone thinks about anything, then you cannot and should
not expect anyone to give a good god damn what you think about
anything. Since you are all about opinion and only your own opinion,
and this thread has degenerated to inane, puerile self-centeredness, I
proclaim this thread now terminated.
JimmyMac
I guess I am here to spoil you fun and games then.
> >> >> But I did know better. If and when you do not like advice, then just
> >> >> ignore
> >> >> it, but don't tell others what to say or not to say to you. Who the
> >> >> hell
> >> >> do
> >> >> you think you are to do that anyway? Is that how you treat your wife?
>
> >> > I certainly tried to ignore your advice but you were relentless,
> >> > harping and harping in a concerted effort to ensure that I not ignore
> >> > your advice. Most rational people when told that their advice is not
> >> > required, get the message. You don't, because you are not rational.
> >> > If you want to be heard you must first learn to listen and you turn a
> >> > deaf ear to others, and yet castigate those who would do the same to
> >> > you. What do you not understand about all this?
>
> >> Never tell others what they can say to you and what they cannot say to
> >> you.
> >> That is not in your control. It is a sign of insanity.
> >> [...]
>
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what you just did in making
> > that statement? You just told me what I cannot say to you. The
> > conundrum continues. Well, you just gotta love self-incrimination.
> > By his own criteria, Ed Dolan just anointed himself ... insane; and,
> > it is about time that he finally admitted what most of us already
> > knew. What is really insane is Ed Dolan's deliberate and concerted
> > effort to impose his opinion and will upon me in an attempt to
> > manipulate and control how I interacted with Ed Gin. Is this not
> > insane?
As expected, you again did not address and issue raidse above ...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what you just did in making
that statement? You just told me what I cannot say to you. The
conundrum continues. Well, you just gotta love self-incrimination.
By his own criteria, Ed Dolan just anointed himself ... insane; and,
it is about time that he finally admitted what most of us already
knew.
> No one in this world cared how you interacted with the criminal vandal troll
> Ed Gin,
Why then did one particular NO ONE (that being you) insist on force
feeding me unwanted, unrequested, and unnecessary advice? That is
precisely what you endeavored to do. When your advice was rejected,
you reacted like a spurned juvenile.
> but you did it on Usenet where the rest of us had to witness your
> disgrace.
So, what's your excuse?
> It was embarrassing - the gorilla vs. the monkey! Ed Gin made a
> fool out of you just as I am doing. A fool that cannot learn from his
> mistakes is indeed a fool!
Opinion stated as fact by one whose opinion matters not because he
mattes not.
> The bottom line is that you never know what the hell you are doing on
> Usenet. Ed Gin at least knew what he was doing and so do I.
Opinion stated as fact by one whose opinion matters not because he
mattes not.
Edward Dolan
ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
> Oh you most certainly engage in argumentation. but in fact do not
> debate because you've not mastered the art and realize that you would
> fail miserably if you were to make the attempt against a worth
> adversary (almost anyone, really).
I do not have a small enough mind to engage in the kind of trivial arguments
that you are so enamored of. You need to find another mental midget like
yourself for that. I suggest you argue more with your wife if she will stand
for it. After all, she was dumb enough to marry you so she should qualify.
In answer to your question (unlike
> you I respond to questions ... that's called dialogue and courtesy),
Jesus Christ God Almighty ... a courteous stalker who resorts to sexual
innuendo! Now I have heard everything!
> Yes, things are more than clear enough. It is all about you. Since
> you don't give a good god damn (thought you were a self-proclaimed
> atheist) what anyone thinks about anything, then you cannot and should
> not expect anyone to give a good god damn what you think about
> anything.
I don't! Whatever made you think I do?
Since you are all about opinion and only your own opinion,
> and this thread has degenerated to inane, puerile self-centeredness, I
> proclaim this thread now terminated.
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
Edward Dolan
>> You are by far a bigger fool than I am because I know what I am doing
>> here
>> and you don't. I am here for fun and games. Why are you here?
>
> I guess I am here to spoil you fun and games then.
That would only be possible if I took you seriously, but I don't. I regard
you as a whiner and a stalker and not even good for laughs. I will soon be
treating you like I treated Gunner Ass on another thread. Rest assured, the
moment I am no longer having any fun, I will be gone in a New York second.
[...]
>> No one in this world cared how you interacted with the criminal vandal
>> troll
>> Ed Gin,
>
> Why then did one particular NO ONE (that being you) insist on force
> feeding me unwanted, unrequested, and unnecessary advice? That is
> precisely what you endeavored to do. When your advice was rejected,
> you reacted like a spurned juvenile.
Nope, I did what I did because it was fun to tweak you, especially after you
made such a show of rejection. You have acted the clown ever since. You are
an absurd little man.
You whined like a woman to stop telling you what to do. Then you said you
did not want to hear what I had to say about that particular subject. A
grownup would have simply ignored me or ceased to communicate, but you are
obsessive about everything you say and do. You are the type of person I
simply can't stand. I wonder how you can stand yourself!
The bottom line is that you are a stalker and a whiner because you care what
others think of you. I don't care what anyone thinks of me when it comes to
Usenet. It is not possible to keep a good name on an unmoderated newsgroup.
The minute you post to such a forum, you announce to the world that you are
a fucking idiot. I know this and you do not. It is why you are such a
pitiful slob and a pathetic little man that one feels more sorry for than
anything else. Arrested development is a frightening thing!
[...]
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:66d0aa35-b1c7-442d...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 25, 1:06 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> You are by far a bigger fool than I am because I know what I am doing
> >> here
> >> and you don't. I am here for fun and games. Why are you here?
>
>
> That would only be possible if I took you seriously, but I don't. I regard
> you as a whiner and a stalker and not even good for laughs. I will soon be
> treating you like I treated Gunner Ass on another thread. Rest assured, the
> moment I am no longer having any fun, I will be gone in a New York second.
> [...]
Gee you really know how to hurt a guy ... NOT!!! So tell me what it
will take to ensure that you are not having fun anymore and I will
promptly oblige and accommodate you.
> >> No one in this world cared how you interacted with the criminal vandal
> >> troll
> >> Ed Gin,
>
> > Why then did one particular NO ONE (that being you) insist on force
> > feeding me unwanted, unrequested, and unnecessary advice? That is
> > precisely what you endeavored to do. When your advice was rejected,
> > you reacted like a spurned juvenile.
>
> Nope, I did what I did because it was fun to tweak you, especially after you
> made such a show of rejection. You have acted the clown ever since. You are
> an absurd little man.
It is interesting to note that a hermit who rejects human interaction
considers himself qualified to offer advice regarding human
interaction. What's wrong with that picture? It is also noteworthy
that when informed that his advice was not required, a self-admitted
hermit who has rejected human interaction choses the term REJECTED
lending credibility to my observation that he behaved like a spurned
juvenile. Apparently Ed Dolan can reject humanity but humanity cannot
reject Ed Dolan. Then again Ed Doaln never has played by the same set
of rules that he expects others to abide by.
> You whined like a woman to stop telling you what to do. Then you said you
> did not want to hear what I had to say about that particular subject. A
> grownup would have simply ignored me or ceased to communicate, but you are
> obsessive about everything you say and do. You are the type of person I
> simply can't stand. I wonder how you can stand yourself!
Obsession was exemplified by your inability to cease providing advice
when asked to do so ... now that's obsession. You needn't introduce
women into the discussion nor stereotype them either. A misanthropic
troglodyte knows nothing of the opposite sex.
> The bottom line is that you are a stalker and a whiner because you care what
> others think of you. I don't care what anyone thinks of me when it comes to
> Usenet. It is not possible to keep a good name on an unmoderated newsgroup.
> The minute you post to such a forum, you announce to the world that you are
> a fucking idiot. I know this and you do not. It is why you are such a
> pitiful slob and a pathetic little man that one feels more sorry for than
> anything else. Arrested development is a frightening thing!
> [...]
Opinion stated as fact by a man whose myopic conception of what life
is all about is funneled through his only contact with the outside
world ... his keyboard.
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f288338e-b804-4268...@w74g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> ALL TOP POSTERS ARE IDIOTS!
>
> > Oh you most certainly engage in argumentation. but in fact do not
> > debate because you've not mastered the art and realize that you would
> > fail miserably if you were to make the attempt against a worth
> > adversary (almost anyone, really).
>
> I do not have a small enough mind
Don't sell yourself short.
> to engage in the kind of trivial arguments
> that you are so enamored of. You need to find another mental midget like
> yourself for that. I suggest you argue more with your wife if she will stand
> for it. After all, she was dumb enough to marry you so she should qualify.
Your failed attempt fo insult acknowledged. With two master's degrees
and a near genius IQ, she doesn't qualify.
> In answer to your question (unlike
>
> > you I respond to questions ... that's called dialogue and courtesy),
>
> Jesus Christ God Almighty ... a courteous stalker who resorts to sexual
> innuendo! Now I have heard everything!
Who, unlike you, responds to questions.
> > Yes, things are more than clear enough. It is all about you. Since
> > you don't give a good god damn (thought you were a self-proclaimed
> > atheist) what anyone thinks about anything, then you cannot and should
> > not expect anyone to give a good god damn what you think about
> > anything.
>
> I don't! Whatever made you think I do?
Well then you have achieved your objective, because no one cares about
what you think.
> Since you are all about opinion and only your own opinion,
>
> > and this thread has degenerated to inane, puerile self-centeredness, I
> > proclaim this thread now terminated.
>
> Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
Just a parting remark in calling this thread dead. You said ... I
don't want to be bothered with facts. I am here for opinion only. I
am all about opinion and nothing else. I don't give a good god damn
what anyone else thinks about anything. It follows that this
effectively curtains any possibility of dialogue because facts don't
interest you, other's opinions don't interest you and even what people
think about you or your opinions. That begs the question. Then why
do you continue to solicit anyone's opinion other than to prolong a
thread with your vacuous gibberish? You also once said ... Jim
McNamara of this newsgroup can help you with your logical thinking as
he is an expert on the subject. Well there is no helping anyone who
is so unwilling to be helped and is as stubbornly thick headed as are
you, so let the monologue begin (soliloquy for deaf ears) .
Edward Dolan
[...]
> > Just a parting remark in calling this thread dead. You said ... I
> don't want to be bothered with facts. I am here for opinion only. I
> am all about opinion and nothing else. I don't give a good god damn
> what anyone else thinks about anything. It follows that this
> effectively curtains any possibility of dialogue because facts don't
> interest you, other's opinions don't interest you and even what people
> think about you or your opinions. That begs the question. Then why
> do you continue to solicit anyone's opinion other than to prolong a
> thread with your vacuous gibberish? You also once said ... Jim
> McNamara of this newsgroup can help you with your logical thinking as
> he is an expert on the subject. Well there is no helping anyone who
> is so unwilling to be helped and is as stubbornly thick headed as are
> you, so let the monologue begin (soliloquy for deaf ears) .
Me? Solicit others' opinions? That idea has never occurred to me in my
entire life!
Edward Dolan
> On Apr 25, 3:54 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > Why then did one particular NO ONE (that being you) insist on force
>> > feeding me unwanted, unrequested, and unnecessary advice? That is
>> > precisely what you endeavored to do. When your advice was rejected,
>> > you reacted like a spurned juvenile.
>>
>> Nope, I did what I did because it was fun to tweak you, especially after
>> you
>> made such a show of rejection. You have acted the clown ever since. You
>> are
>> an absurd little man.
>
> It is interesting to note that a hermit who rejects human interaction
> considers himself qualified to offer advice regarding human
> interaction. What's wrong with that picture? It is also noteworthy
> that when informed that his advice was not required, a self-admitted
> hermit who has rejected human interaction choses the term REJECTED
> lending credibility to my observation that he behaved like a spurned
> juvenile. Apparently Ed Dolan can reject humanity but humanity cannot
> reject Ed Dolan. Then again Ed Doaln never has played by the same set
> of rules that he expects others to abide by.
You should have just told me to go to hell the same as you should have done
with Ed Gin, but you carried on like a woman. Rejection does not bother me
at all, but it apparently is your number one hang-up. Just grow up and take
it in stride that others are going to dislike you just because you are you.
That is par for the course.
>> You whined like a woman to stop telling you what to do. Then you said you
>> did not want to hear what I had to say about that particular subject. A
>> grownup would have simply ignored me or ceased to communicate, but you
>> are
>> obsessive about everything you say and do. You are the type of person I
>> simply can't stand. I wonder how you can stand yourself!
>
> Obsession was exemplified by your inability to cease providing advice
> when asked to do so ... now that's obsession. You needn't introduce
> women into the discussion nor stereotype them either. A misanthropic
> troglodyte knows nothing of the opposite sex.
I already told you it was fun for me to tweak you and to see how you would
react.
By the way, you are getting too wordy. Lay aside that thesaurus and shorten
your paragraphs or I will have to fail you yet once again.
[...]
JimmyMac
For once I'll take your advice, if it's not to late ... GO TO
HELL ,ED!!!
> the same as you should have done
> with Ed Gin, but you carried on like a woman.
An known hernatic misanthrope knows nothing of womankind and therefore
should neither stereotype the lot, nor spew gratuitous insults that
unfairly demean the fairer sex.
> Rejection does not bother me
> at all, but it apparently is your number one hang-up. Just grow up and take
> it in stride that others are going to dislike you just because you are you.
> That is par for the course.
Opinion stated as fact.
> >> You whined like a woman to stop telling you what to do. Then you said you
> >> did not want to hear what I had to say about that particular subject. A
> >> grownup would have simply ignored me or ceased to communicate, but you
> >> are
> >> obsessive about everything you say and do. You are the type of person I
> >> simply can't stand. I wonder how you can stand yourself!
>
> > Obsession was exemplified by your inability to cease providing advice
> > when asked to do so ... now that's obsession. You needn't introduce
> > women into the discussion nor stereotype them either. A misanthropic
> > troglodyte knows nothing of the opposite sex.
>
> I already told you it was fun for me to tweak you and to see how you would
> react.
>
> By the way, you are getting too wordy. Lay aside that thesaurus and shorten
> your paragraphs or I will have to fail you yet once again.
Providing unrequested, unwelcome and unnecessary advice is a bad habit
of yours. You may think you are offering sound advice, but are 99%
sound and 1% advice, but I digress. Errant assumption ... I dont'
need to consult a Thesaurus to come up with troglodyte or
misanthrope. You'll have to excuse me if I don't apologize because
you need to consult a dictionary to learn what you are.
> [...]
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> aka
> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
Providing
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6289ddcd-a06f-4ff6...@w74g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> [...]
>
> > > Just a parting remark in calling this thread dead. You said ... I
> > don't want to be bothered with facts. I am here for opinion only. I
> > am all about opinion and nothing else. I don't give a good god damn
> > what anyone else thinks about anything. It follows that this
> > effectively curtains any possibility of dialogue because facts don't
> > interest you, other's opinions don't interest you and even what people
> > think about you or your opinions. That begs the question. Then why
> > do you continue to solicit anyone's opinion other than to prolong a
> > thread with your vacuous gibberish? You also once said ... Jim
> > McNamara of this newsgroup can help you with your logical thinking as
> > he is an expert on the subject. Well there is no helping anyone who
> > is so unwilling to be helped and is as stubbornly thick headed as are
> > you, so let the monologue begin (soliloquy for deaf ears) .
>
> Me? Solicit others' opinions? That idea has never occurred to me in my
> entire life!
Two letters come to mind her ... B & S. In this thread alone, there
are many examples you badgering me for my wife' opinion and that
qualifies for solicitation of opinion no matter what kind of spin you
try to put on it. If you are going to lie to me and the readership
(not uncommon by the way), at least use some imagination and make it
believable. Don't insult our intelligence by pissing over our
shoulders and try to convince us it's raining.
Edward Dolan
Hells Bells, I don't care what your wife thinks about anything under the sun
just as I don't care what you think about anything under the sun. I was just
trying to determine if she is as crazy as you are. If you have been married
for more than 2 minutes, I suspect she is, although mistakes can be made in
that department of life.
marika
"Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote in message
news:XradnQCf4o7u5YjV...@prairiewave.com...
The issue is people trying to stay busy creating issues where there are
none. Trying to look smart. I am sure someone will get a great big bonus
check for an award for writing this non -thing.
mk5000
"Get my money, buy my medicine
Buy my medicine, buy my medicine
Yeah, you know I got to have that medicine
That prescription medicine baby"--Snoop Dog
JimmyMac
Hells Bells, just like you don't care what me or my wife thinks,
neither of us care about what you think. Checkmate. We are DONE
here. What make little sense though is your concern about here sanity
when you should be concerned about your. Crazy folks are screened out
of educational programs for who are seeking to advanced degrees for
psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers and therapists. Since my
wife successfully completed the program (straight A's), draw your own
conclusions. I place far more faith in th the evaluation from
professional sector than in someone who has never met me, my wife and
knows little about either of us than i ever would in someone with so
many hangups as to appear in dire need of analysis and therapy. You
want to know to acquaint yourself with a real crazy person. Just walk
over to the nearest mirror and you'll come face to face with one.
Edward Dolan
"marika" <marik...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:z5mdndWZV7MUdYjV...@rcn.net...[...]
>> Hells Bells, I don't care what your wife thinks about anything under the
>> sun just as I don't care what you think about anything under the sun. I
>> was just trying to determine if she is as crazy as you are. If you have
>> been married for more than 2 minutes, I suspect she is, although mistakes
>> can be made in that department of life.
>
> The issue is people trying to stay busy creating issues where there are
> none. Trying to look smart. I am sure someone will get a great big bonus
> check for an award for writing this non -thing.
Marika is a female and so knows all about trivialities and creating issues
where none exist. Hells Bells, that is what females were put on earth to do.
And some males are dumb enough to fall for it. But Marika is a tease and she
will never put out. Don't we all just know the type!
Fucking Regards,
Edward Dolan
But your wife does not know what you are doing on Usenet. When she does, she
is going to divorce you. Just ask Marika. She knows about these things being
of that gender herself.
By the way, your paragraph above should have been broken into 2 or 3 shorter
paragraphs, but you run everything together, a sure sign of insanity. You
are like a babbling brook that just runs on and on, never knowing where or
when to stop.
Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After your
divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love with
me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever discussing the
Great Ed Dolan.
marika
>
> Marika is a female and so knows all about trivialities and creating issues
> where none exist. Hells Bells, that is what females were put on earth to
> do. And some males are dumb enough to fall for it. But Marika is a tease
> and she will never put out. Don't we all just know the type!
>
Ed You have never yet tried jewelry with me
heart pendants can be cheap, especially if the diamonds are the size of dust
specks.
mk5000
(He wants everything to be right) 'Cause I'm... (Snoop Dogg!)
I'm so hood, so true
and every time that you see me cuzz, I'm oh so blue!
(To get that you have to stay.. on top of your game)--INtrology
Tom Sherman
>
> [...]
> heart pendants can be cheap, especially if the diamonds are the size of
If you want dust speck size diamonds, I have an old masonry saw blade
lying around.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
marika
>
> But your wife does not know what you are doing on Usenet.
You know, how obnoxious can one person be? It's not like people are
coming from OUT OF TOWN or anything or making ALL THEIR PLANS around
this or not, and YEAH 4PM OR 6 PM REALLY DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
>When she does, she is going to divorce you.
I hope I did not crash it. Something very fishy is up. As soon as I sent
her the Congo petition plea she forwarded something right back, but
since I started my campaign I have not heard one peep from her. I get
to see what goes in my SPAM folder and she has not emailed ONE SINGLE
THING since then.
>Just ask Marika.
I think she ii am s the one person on the planet who ignores real email and
only opnes forwarded stuff, or else now I 'just delete' anything others send
me because 'it must be junk just like the previous 3000 people have sent.'
>She knows about these things being of that gender herself.
Yes, although 4 pm is just a TAD difficult. while 6 pm is no problem.
>
> By the way, your paragraph above should have been broken into 2 or 3
> shorter paragraphs, but you run everything together, a sure sign of
> insanity. You are like a babbling brook that just runs on and on, never
> knowing where or when to stop.
>
> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After your
> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love
> with me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever
> discussing the Great Ed Dolan.
I don't know Ed if my husband spent time on usenet or biking or proving the
effects of bikers on the environement it would be ok to me
what is it that his wife needs to know that he does on usenet. So far my
doings on usenet are confined to typing and then more typing. Wow what an
utter threat to a marriage
You are right Ed I am insanely in love with you
and I will be soon dumping you for whoever the heck it is that you responded
to.
Where's my diamond speck heart, I could change my mind
mk5000
"I'm the big cat, fish in the bowl
Basically you hear these rappers out here using my flow"--snoop dog, think
about it
JimmyMac
Predictably, you failed to address any of what I wrote above,
introducing another tangential diversion. If you are not interested
in anyone's opinion and don't care what anyone think, then don't ask
anything of or about my wife.
Since you failed to comment, I suppose you accepted my explanation
that she is not crazy although what you think doesn't really matter.
Several times you've made the unsubstantiated assertion that my wife
doesn't what I do on Usenet and will divorce me. I've told you that
she know and divorce is not imminent, but you won't accept that,
continuing to babble on again and again, but that doesn't much matter
either. Repeating nonsense again and again is all part of the game
you play and an unimaginative, boring one it is too. It's all about
you and it's all about monologue. Trolls are like that.
Not that it matter, but who are you baiting me, Marika or "C" ... both
of the above?
> By the way, your paragraph above should have been broken into 2 or 3 shorter
> paragraphs, but you run everything together, a sure sign of insanity.
Yep should have broke that one up I suppose, but who really gives a
shit? You do and that's a sign of insanity.
> You
> are like a babbling brook that just runs on and on, never knowing where or
> when to stop.
An Dolan self-portrait if ever there was one.
> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After your
> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love with
> me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever discussing the
> Great Ed Dolan.
You are not a topic worthy of discussion and I can assure you that
nothing positive would ever be said of you. anyways. No one is madly
in love with you except M.V. and yourself of course.
Edward Dolan
>> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After your
>> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love
>> with me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever
>> discussing the Great Ed Dolan.
>
> I don't know Ed if my husband spent time on usenet or biking or proving
> the effects of bikers on the environement it would be ok to me
Stop pretending that you are married. No man would ever hook up with a crazy
slut like you. I KNOW that you are lezzy, but you need to be properly
fucked. JimmyMac is the man for you. He has infinite patience and would put
up with your digressions no matter how stupid.
> what is it that his wife needs to know that he does on usenet. So far my
> doings on usenet are confined to typing and then more typing. Wow what an
> utter threat to a marriage
He is a stalker ... having nothing better to do with his life. Maybe he will
stalk you too if you hang around long enough.
> You are right Ed I am insanely in love with you
Well, of course you are! Everyone on ARBR loves Ed Dolan the Great. But this
love of yours can never be. I am a Great Saint and you a sinful slut. I
think that says it all.
Fucking Regards,
Edward Dolan
[...]
> Predictably, you failed to address any of what I wrote above,
> introducing another tangential diversion. If you are not interested
> in anyone's opinion and don't care what anyone think, then don't ask
> anything of or about my wife.
I just want to know if she is as crazy as you are.
> Since you failed to comment, I suppose you accepted my explanation
> that she is not crazy although what you think doesn't really matter.
I need to know what she thinks of what you are doing on Usenet.
> Several times you've made the unsubstantiated assertion that my wife
> doesn't what I do on Usenet and will divorce me. I've told you that
> she know and divorce is not imminent, but you won't accept that,
> continuing to babble on again and again, but that doesn't much matter
> either. Repeating nonsense again and again is all part of the game
> you play and an unimaginative, boring one it is too. It's all about
> you and it's all about monologue. Trolls are like that.
I think you would lie about what your wife thinks. Let her post to ARBR in
her own words on what she thinks is going on here.
> Not that it matter, but who are you baiting me, Marika or "C" ... both
> of the above?
Marika is as nutty as you are and is equally obsessed with My Greatness. You
would be ideal for her once she is cured of her lesbianism. I am just a
cupid at heart.
[...]
>> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After your
>> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love
>> with
>> me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever discussing
>> the
>> Great Ed Dolan.
>
> You are not a topic worthy of discussion and I can assure you that
> nothing positive would ever be said of you. anyways. No one is madly
> in love with you except M.V. and yourself of course.
I assure you that Marika is madly in love with me. I can read between the
lines and she desperately wants my approval just as you do. But alas, that
can never be. Marika is a sinful slut and Ed Dolan the Great is a Great
Saint known far and wide as Saint Edward the Great. I can only be John the
Baptist to her Salome.
marika
>
>
> Well, of course you are! Everyone on ARBR loves Ed Dolan the Great. But
> this love of yours can never be. >
Yes Ed, as we established yesterday, I love you as God the father to your
Jesus
kids often hate their parents til they come to some kind of maturity
mk5000
"Blonde hair, long legs, a real live Barbie
No autographs, I ain't signin' now
Act like you been around a boss,"-Deez Hollywood Nights, Snoop Dogg
marika
>
> "JimmyMac" <jimmy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e9fd0d22-69e4-4850...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> [...]
>> Predictably, you failed to address any of what I wrote above,
>> introducing another tangential diversion. If you are not interested
>> in anyone's opinion and don't care what anyone think, then don't ask
>> anything of or about my wife.
>
> I just want to know if she is as crazy as you are.
also i wonder why are you still so damn obsessed with JM's wife
>
>> Since you failed to comment, I suppose you accepted my explanation
>> that she is not crazy although what you think doesn't really matter.
>
> I need to know what she thinks of what you are doing on Usenet.
you don't need to know any such thing
she is married when will you ever stop writing about her. she never loved
you/
and she never will
she'd run screaming if she ever knew how you obsess about her
>
>> Several times you've made the unsubstantiated assertion that my wife
>> doesn't what I do on Usenet and will divorce me. I've told you that
>> she know and divorce is not imminent, but you won't accept that,
>> continuing to babble on again and again, but that doesn't much matter
>> either. Repeating nonsense again and again is all part of the game
>> you play and an unimaginative, boring one it is too. It's all about
>> you and it's all about monologue. Trolls are like that.
>
> I think you would lie about what your wife thinks.
it seems like such a waste of time to wonder what she thinks, but what is
worse is that all your anger
about her is targeted at me. so wrongly
because all i ever wanted was to be your friend, but instead, i got the
brunt of
your anger for the fact that she is totally unreachable to you
>Let her post to ARBR in her own words on what she thinks is going on here.\
i am an honorable person
I am sure she is too.
>
>> Not that it matter, but who are you baiting me, Marika or "C" ... both
>> of the above?
>
> Marika is as nutty as you are and is equally obsessed with My Greatness.
i don't lie
I've been obsessed with a lot of things but that's not one of them
>You would be ideal for her once she is cured of her lesbianism.
people know me for my unfailing miserable honesty
I can't remember being a lesbian
> I am just a cupid at heart.
> [...]
>
i didn't deserve it
>>> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After
>>> your
>>> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love
>>> with
>>> me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever discussing
>>> the
>>> Great Ed Dolan.
>>
>> You are not a topic worthy of discussion and I can assure you that
>> nothing positive would ever be said of you. anyways. No one is madly
>> in love with you except M.V. and yourself of course.
>
> I assure you that Marika is madly in love with me. I can read between the
> lines and she desperately wants my approval just as you do. But alas, that
> can never be. Marika is a sinful slut and Ed Dolan the Great is a Great
> Saint known far and wide as Saint Edward the Great. I can only be John the
> Baptist to her Salome.
o that's hysterical, that was my great aunt's name
you are a mess Ed, not saintly not holy, kind of nutz, definitely worth
sparring with
a nemesis
did you ever notice how emesis is part of the word nemesis. you are emesis
the nemesis
mk5000
"Trick these a pac stay breazy up in the club blowin' trees with (Snoop)
cool lava poppin'
enboddas rockin' T.R. I'm at the base go (blow) I'm in a truck and I ain't
stoppin' straight to
my yaught let's get it poppin' cool lava poppin' enboddas rockin' T.R. I'm
at the base go
(blow) "--gansta like me, snoop dog
>
Edward Dolan
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:y86dnQ0-09VFa4rV...@prairiewave.com...
>>
>
>>
>> Well, of course you are! Everyone on ARBR loves Ed Dolan the Great. But
>> this love of yours can never be. >
>
>
> Yes Ed, as we established yesterday, I love you as God the father to your
> Jesus
I didn't think it was possible to ever establish anything with a vacuous
bird brain like you. But you are not God - I am!
Edward Dolan
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:srKdnXbERPhLYorV...@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> "JimmyMac" <jimmy...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:e9fd0d22-69e4-4850...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>> [...]
>>> Predictably, you failed to address any of what I wrote above,
>>> introducing another tangential diversion. If you are not interested
>>> in anyone's opinion and don't care what anyone think, then don't ask
>>> anything of or about my wife.
>>
>> I just want to know if she is as crazy as you are.
>
> also i wonder why are you still so damn obsessed with JM's wife
Once his wife discovers what he has been doing on Usenet (stalking) she will
divorce him. He will be left only with his faithful dog and so justice will
have been served in the world.
>>> Since you failed to comment, I suppose you accepted my explanation
>>> that she is not crazy although what you think doesn't really matter.
>>
>> I need to know what she thinks of what you are doing on Usenet.
>
> you don't need to know any such thing
>
> she is married when will you ever stop writing about her. she never loved
> you/
> and she never will
>
> she'd run screaming if she ever knew how you obsess about her
She is married to a nut case so she is most likely nuts herself. I'm sure
she screams at him all the time, especially at night when he tries to molest
her.
>>> Several times you've made the unsubstantiated assertion that my wife
>>> doesn't what I do on Usenet and will divorce me. I've told you that
>>> she know and divorce is not imminent, but you won't accept that,
>>> continuing to babble on again and again, but that doesn't much matter
>>> either. Repeating nonsense again and again is all part of the game
>>> you play and an unimaginative, boring one it is too. It's all about
>>> you and it's all about monologue. Trolls are like that.
>>
>> I think you would lie about what your wife thinks.
>
> it seems like such a waste of time to wonder what she thinks, but what is
> worse is that all your anger
> about her is targeted at me. so wrongly
> because all i ever wanted was to be your friend, but instead, i got the
> brunt of
> your anger for the fact that she is totally unreachable to you
You are a freak. No one thinks you are funny except for your lezzy
fuckmates. The best cure for what ails you is for a man to fuck your silly
brains out. But I am a Great Saint and you are a sinful slut. Therefore I
can never fuck you, but JimmyMac will do it once his divorce comes through.
>>Let her post to ARBR in her own words on what she thinks is going on here.
>
> i am an honorable person
>
> I am sure she is too.
What does a lezzy freak like you know about anything!
>>> Not that it matter, but who are you baiting me, Marika or "C" ... both
>>> of the above?
>>
>> Marika is as nutty as you are and is equally obsessed with My Greatness.
>
> i don't lie
>
> I've been obsessed with a lot of things but that's not one of them
>
>
>>You would be ideal for her once she is cured of her lesbianism.
>
> people know me for my unfailing miserable honesty
>
> I can't remember being a lesbian
Of course you are! Why else would you be sucking up to One so Great and Holy
as Myself. You want forgiveness for your lezzy ways but, being a Great
Saint, I only condemn sluts. Jeez, you seem not to know anything at all
about Great Saints.
>> I am just a cupid at heart.
>> [...]
>>
>
> i didn't deserve it
>
>>>> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After
>>>> your
>>>> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love
>>>> with
>>>> me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever discussing
>>>> the
>>>> Great Ed Dolan.
>>>
>>> You are not a topic worthy of discussion and I can assure you that
>>> nothing positive would ever be said of you. anyways. No one is madly
>>> in love with you except M.V. and yourself of course.
>>
>> I assure you that Marika is madly in love with me. I can read between the
>> lines and she desperately wants my approval just as you do. But alas,
>> that can never be. Marika is a sinful slut and Ed Dolan the Great is a
>> Great Saint known far and wide as Saint Edward the Great. I can only be
>> John the Baptist to her Salome.
>
> o that's hysterical, that was my great aunt's name
Come back and see me after you have thoroughly fucked yourself. Also, take 2
aspirins and say 100 Our Fathers and 1000 Hail Marys. The Reverend Doctor
Dolan.
marika
>
>
> I didn't think it was possible to ever establish anything with a vacuous
> bird brain like you. But you are not God - I am!
>
this could just be spam i can't tell
mk5000
" It is
a pretty cool design and the community will be morphed over the years
by the community. Everyones input matters! Help a fellow horse chick
and come register in our forums and help us get rolling! It would
mean alot if everyone could help and spread the word. Thanks so much."--
> Brandy
marika
>
>
> Once his wife discovers what he has been doing on Usenet (stalking) she
> will divorce him. He will be left only with his faithful dog and so
> justice will have been served in the world.
>
probably spam but weird enough
mk5000
"with giant circles of
the kind of circles include everything
don't be the with the fainest praise
it's just a symptom of the live age "--Gardenia, Stephen Malkmus
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e9fd0d22-69e4-4850...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> [...]
>
> > Predictably, you failed to address any of what I wrote above,
> > introducing another tangential diversion. If you are not interested
> > in anyone's opinion and don't care what anyone think, then don't ask
> > anything of or about my wife.
>
> I just want to know if she is as crazy as you are.
Once again you failed to address any of what I wrote above even though
reminded. Your inquiry is senseless. You cannot even consider that
one person is a crazy as another until you have first established that
the first person is crazy to whom you are making the comparison. Will
you ever learn to apply some logic??? What you are attempting to do
is what's crazy.
> > Since you failed to comment, I suppose you accepted my explanation
> > that she is not crazy although what you think doesn't really matter.
>
> I need to know what she thinks of what you are doing on Usenet.
And whose opinion do you seek ... mine or my wife's? You need to know
NOTHING! You've as much as said so yourself by indicating that you
don't care what others think and don't value others opinions. You
can't have it both ways, so pick one. Make up you mind why don't you
and show some degree of consistency in your thought process and
posts. Focus man focus.
> > Several times you've made the unsubstantiated assertion that my wife
> > doesn't what I do on Usenet and will divorce me. I've told you that
> > she know and divorce is not imminent, but you won't accept that,
> > continuing to babble on again and again, but that doesn't much matter
> > either. Repeating nonsense again and again is all part of the game
> > you play and an unimaginative, boring one it is too. It's all about
> > you and it's all about monologue. Trolls are like that.
>
> I think you would lie about what your wife thinks. Let her post to ARBR in
> her own words on what she thinks is going on here.
1. I could care less what you think about what I might or might not
do.
2. I have told you over and over that my wife doesn't participate in
Usenet newsgroups. How many times need I repeat that before it sinks
into that thick skull of yours?
3. I have told you over and over that my wife does not want to hear
anything more of or about you. How many times need I repeat that
before it sinks into that thick skull of yours?
4. I have told you over and over that my wife is not parct and parcel
of this discussion. How many times need I repeat that before it
sinks into that thick skull of yours?
5. Besides, what gurantee woudl you have that she did the posting if I
were to just use her PC, her email address and posted on her behalf.
Although I would not, the point is that knowing this you could easily
state that is what you believed this especially since I indicated that
my wife does not make Usenet newsgroup posts.and you would undoubtedly
do just if for no other reason than to prolong this thread. You'll
just have to forgive me for being unwilling to provide you with that
opportunity.
> > Not that it matter, but who are you baiting me, Marika or "C" ... both
> > of the above?
>
> Marika is as nutty as you are and is equally obsessed with My Greatness. You
> would be ideal for her once she is cured of her lesbianism. I am just a
> cupid at heart.
> [...]
You misspelled "STUPID at heart". How can one be obsessed with
something non-existent??? I presume that Marika considers you to be
the sick old fool that I do. She "tweaks" you rather well too, by the
way.
> >> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After your
> >> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in love
> >> with
> >> me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever discussing
> >> the
> >> Great Ed Dolan.
>
> > You are not a topic worthy of discussion and I can assure you that
> > nothing positive would ever be said of you. anyways. No one is madly
> > in love with you except M.V. and yourself of course.
>
> I assure you that Marika is madly in love with me. I can read between the
> lines and she desperately wants my approval just as you do.
Don't flatter yourself. You are the last person that I would ever
seek, desire or accept approval from. Go back ad read that again
until it sinks in.
Edward Dolan
>> Marika is as nutty as you are and is equally obsessed with My Greatness.
>> You
>> would be ideal for her once she is cured of her lesbianism. I am just a
>> cupid at heart.
>> [...]
>
> You misspelled "STUPID at heart". How can one be obsessed with
> something non-existent??? I presume that Marika considers you to be
> the sick old fool that I do. She "tweaks" you rather well too, by the
> way.
Poor Marika is a mindless scatterbrain as are all females. They are only
good for one thing, but Marika is not even good for that. I think she is a
lezzy.
>> >> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After
>> >> your
>> >> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in
>> >> love
>> >> with
>> >> me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever
>> >> discussing
>> >> the
>> >> Great Ed Dolan.
>>
>> > You are not a topic worthy of discussion and I can assure you that
>> > nothing positive would ever be said of you. anyways. No one is madly
>> > in love with you except M.V. and yourself of course.
>>
>> I assure you that Marika is madly in love with me. I can read between the
>> lines and she desperately wants my approval just as you do.
>
> Don't flatter yourself. You are the last person that I would ever
> seek, desire or accept approval from. Go back ad read that again
> until it sinks in.
I can't think of any other reason why you would stalk me. Can you? Ask your
therapist of a wife if it is normal for an adult male to stalk another adult
male.
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:733428a4-bb81-4a02...@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 30, 12:13 am, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> Marika is as nutty as you are and is equally obsessed with My Greatness.
> >> You
> >> would be ideal for her once she is cured of her lesbianism. I am just a
> >> cupid at heart.
> >> [...]
>
> > You misspelled "STUPID at heart". How can one be obsessed with
> > something non-existent??? I presume that Marika considers you to be
> > the sick old fool that I do. She "tweaks" you rather well too, by the
> > way.
>
> Poor Marika is a mindless scatterbrain as are all females.
The narrow minded closet queen disdainfully paints all females with
the same broad grush.
> They are only good for one thing,
And what would that be and how would you know?
> but Marika is not even good for that. I think she is a
> lezzy.
>
>
>
> >> >> Speaking of babbling brooks, mindless Marika is like that too. After
> >> >> your
> >> >> divorce, you might want to look her up even though she is madly in
> >> >> love
> >> >> with
> >> >> me. Then the two of you could babble away together - forever
> >> >> discussing
> >> >> the
> >> >> Great Ed Dolan.
>
> >> > You are not a topic worthy of discussion and I can assure you that
> >> > nothing positive would ever be said of you. anyways. No one is madly
> >> > in love with you except M.V. and yourself of course.
>
> >> I assure you that Marika is madly in love with me. I can read between the
> >> lines and she desperately wants my approval just as you do.
>
> > Don't flatter yourself. You are the last person that I would ever
> > seek, desire or accept approval from. Go back ad read that again
> > until it sinks in.
>
> I can't think of any other reason why you would stalk me. Can you?
Yep to annoy the equal opportunity annoyer ... to give you a dose of
what you dish out to others.
> Ask your
> therapist of a wife if it is normal for an adult male to stalk another adult
> male.
Would this be a thinly disguised sexual innuendo from the closet
queen? I'll say this one last time. My wife is not part an parcel of
this discussion. Having said this many times, all further references
to her and requests regarding her will simply be disregarded. Dolan
doesn't care what others think and doesn't value the opinions of
others, so why does he even bother? Well, because that is what trolls
do.. If we were to take him at his work, then one must ask when he
solicits an opinion is not such a request itself incongruous and
pointless? The conundrum continues!
Edward Dolan
>> Poor Marika is a mindless scatterbrain as are all females.
>
> The narrow minded closet queen disdainfully paints all females with
Women do not even belong to the same species as men. They are exotics.
[...]
>> I can't think of any other reason why you would stalk me. Can you?
>
> Yep to annoy the equal opportunity annoyer ... to give you a dose of
> what you dish out to others.
I am not annoyed, only puzzled by your strange behavior. Unlike you, I do
not care in the slightest what anyone in the world thinks of me, least of
all you.
>> Ask your
>> therapist of a wife if it is normal for an adult male to stalk another
>> adult
>> male.
>
> Would this be a thinly disguised sexual innuendo from the closet
> queen?
Unlike you, I do not engage in sexual innuendo. I come right out and call
names. It is more fun that way.
I'll say this one last time. My wife is not part an parcel of
> this discussion. Having said this many times, all further references
> to her and requests regarding her will simply be disregarded. Dolan
> doesn't care what others think and doesn't value the opinions of
> others, so why does he even bother? Well, because that is what trolls
> do.. If we were to take him at his work, then one must ask when he
> solicits an opinion is not such a request itself incongruous and
> pointless? The conundrum continues!
Nope, JimmyMac is scared to run his bizarre behavior on Usenet past his
wife. I think that says it all. Jeez, what a coward! Scared of his own wife.
What is he, a man or a mouse?
JimmyMac
> "JimmyMac" <jimmyma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Errant assertion previously addressed many times and as indicated
above ... ignored.