-Caveat Lector-
Nessie,
"FWD" just means "Forwarded" and is not a disclaimer
and is automatic on most of the software I have ever
used."FYI"has to at least be typed in. Now why would
a person type that in if it did not mean something.
It means something is just being sent along for
informational value without judgment passed one way or
another.
If it "appars to ALL THE WORLD" that I have called
somebody a "coon" why did no one else attack me?
Becuase it is a LIE and you, NESSIE are a LIAR. I did
not call anybody anything. You, on the other hand,
called me stupid, repeatedly and a fool and said I
should not post here. Then you threatened me with
physical violence in how in person you would not be so
polite. How dare you lie and say I said something I
did not and threaten me, you little creep!! I assure
you I am not one bit frightened by your threats and
personal attacks. You should have said the ARTICle
called somebody a "coon" and not me because I did not
but I AM CALLING YOU, NESSIE, A LIAR because that is
what you are and have just proven yourself to be.
I suppose this is how you are always "civil."
Remember a while back when Kris put the "Caveat
Lector" back on every post? That was so assholes like
you would not assume because a person posts something,
they endorse it. Personal beliefs are just that and I
have no intention of sharing mine with scum like you,
Mr. Name-calling Liar.
You prove every FBI agent is a liar and evil. I would
think some are and some are not just like everybody
else. It is unfortunate that you were hit by a car
but that does NOT give you the right to call me names.
I did not do it. There are degrees and levels of
misconduct and intoxication. Comparing an incident of
DUI with no injuries is nothing like Manson where
murders were committed. Some people have car wrecks
and run others down without being under the influence
of alcohol, too. Defending one is NOT defending ALL.
Driving while intoxicatd is wrong and I have stated
that all along. I know a man who has driven home from
a bar looped every night for forty years, however,
without injuring another person other than himself.
Oh you are so sophistocated in your liberal views!
Well, Clinton and Jackson both PROFESS to be Baptists
and practice a religion that condemns adultry. I'll
bet his daughter was not at all embarassed by his
actions! You would not have been and that is the
measure by which you think the universe is gauged--the
World According to Nessie.
DO NOT THREATEN ME AGAIN, EVER, NESSIE and do not
bother to call me names, either. I call you a liar
only in response to your having lied about my post.
In the future, delete anything I post and refrain from
commenting, calling me names and threatening me. You
are 'way out of line here and have no right to do so.
This is some friendly advice you would do well to
heed.
Kindred Spirit
--- Nessie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> >Most people acknowledge the "follies of youth."
>
> By that logic, we ought to turn the Manson gang
> loose. After all, they
> were pretty young at the time they killed those
> people.
>
>
> >Nobody cares about Clinton's sex life!
>
> That is patently false. He wouldn�t have lied about
> it if he hadn�t been
> asked, and he wouldn�t have been asked if they
> didn�t care.
>
> You yourself care, and said so, because it happened
> at the office. In
> the same office, 365 days a year for eight years in
> a row, he refused to
> lift the blockade of Iraq. At least half a million
> civilians
> died,because of that, almost all of them women and
> children. Why don�t
> you seem to care about that?
>
>
> >It demonstrates lack of judgment and character and
> was lying to a
> federal grand jury.
>
> Lying to protect a woman�s reputation used to be
> considered an honorable
> thing to do.
>
> Lying to a federal grand jury, or to a federal
> anything, is not only not
> wrong, it�s a duty. The federal government is EVIL.
> It murders innocent
> women and children in cold blood. Doing anything
> whatsoever to help it
> in any way, especially telling it what it wants to
> know, makes one an
> accessory to its crimes.
>
>
> >That is not the issue and not the complaint
> although pretty shoddy
> behavior for a married man, etc.
>
> That depends on the marriage. Many people practice
> open marriage. Who
> are you to tell other people how to practice their
> marriage?
>
> �Adulterers� are apparently a big enough voting bloc
> to elect a
> president, especially when they combine with the
> draft dodgers and pot
> smokers. Were this not true, Clinton never would
> have gotten elected in
> the first place.
> Together, adulterers, draft dodgers and pot smokers
> are apparently the
> majority in this country, and the rest of you would
> do well to sit down,
> shut up and quit hassling us before we get mad
> enough to slap you down.
> Go lead your own lives and leave us alone. Our
> patience is running out.
>
>
>
> >And yes, I realize others have "done it, too" but
> that does not make
> it a fine example of the exactly best behavior in
> his position, lying
> to grand juries aside.
>
>
> That�s true only to people who think sex is wrong.
> To the rest of us, it
> is perfectly fine behavior. If anything it made the
> guy more likable. It
> certainly didn�t cancel out the half million
> murders, but it sure made
> him seem like a nicer person than those meddlesome
> prudes who attacked
> him for it. They are EVIL, if for no other reason
> than they distracted
> the public from his REAL crimes, the half million
> murders. People who
> try to tell others how to lead their sex lives are
> scum. They should die
> off and quit wasting air.
>
>
>
> >It was a very stupid thing for a person in his
> unique position to do
> period.
>
> With that, I agree. But that in no way justifies
> what was done to him
> over it. Sex is the SOLE business of the people
> involve. It�s not your
> business, It�s not my business. And it certainly
> isn�t the government�s
> business. Do you want the government telling YOU how
> to do it, or who to
> do it with?
>
>
> > So now Clinton is a perfect gentleman the epitome
> of gracious
> treatment of women, a model for all men to follow.
>
> I never said that. Don�t put words in my mouth. It�s
> rude. It�s
> dishonest.
>
> Personally, I don't think he's a gentleman at all. I
> think he's a
> villian. OTOH, a whole lot of women sure do seem to
> like him a lot.
> There must be some reason.
>
>
>
> >YOU prove that he (Bush) endangered the lives of
> others and that there
> were other drivers even present at the time. He
> could have been
> basically alone on the road with the officer issuing
> the ticket. YOU
> prove he was beyond his personal tolerance of
> alcohol
>
>
> There was at least one other driver on the road, the
> cop. And Bush was
> too drunk to see him in time. Whoever else was there
> escaped with their
> lives by blind luck.
>
>
> > as some people are able to tolerate blood levels
> much higher than
> others. Prove that he is not one of these.
>
> ANY alcohol impairs the ability to drive. Science
> has proven this
> conclusively and repeatedly.
>
> There is NO excuse for driving with alcohol in your
> blood, not any, not
> ever. I�m living proof. Thirty years ago a drunk
> driver ran off the
> road, ran me down, and drove off, leaving me to die
> in a ditch. It still
> hurts, every single day, every step I take. If in
> the unlikely event
> that fate ever puts him in my hands, I fully intend
> to hurt the man, and
> I�m going to take my time doing it, too.
>
> When you defend drunk drivers, you�re defending the
> guy who ran me down.
> Imagine how that makes me feel about you. You�re
> lucky I�m as polite as
> I am. If you did it in person, I wouldn't be.
>
>
>
> >I conceded that AT THE TIME, driving under the
> influence of alcohol was
> not given the seriousness it deserved but you have
> to launch a personal
> attack, every time I post it seems, don't you?
>
> Look, you appeared for all the world to be calling
> somebody a �coon.�
> You DEFINITELY defended drunk driving. People like
> that don�t deserve to
> be treated politely. You're getting of lightly.
>
>
>
> >Well, I take exception to your assertion that I am
> a fool, etc.
>
> You appeared to be taking the word of the FBI, a
> known terrorist
> organization, against Rosa Parks, one of America�s
> greatest (IMHO)
> heroines. This makes you look either foolish or
> evil. By calling you
> foolish, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
>
>
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
