Re: FUCK THIS MOTHER FUCKING GROUP, GAWD DAMMIT

On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 10:30:42 -0800, "Juba" <juba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>"Cabbi" <cabbi@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:11sr54qoklri010@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Juba,
>> my "ignorance" is based on the fact that I haven't and cannot read
>> every post to this group. It's not much of a defence, granted, but
>> it's the truth. If you feel differently about the issue, you are free
>> to post your opinions and supporting data. That helps me see where
>> you are coming from, by the way. But I also have some background info
>> about this and my opinions come from all that I've been able to read.
>> I'm open to any information you may have, but I'm also pretty
>> tired of the snipe and counter snipe that masks as information.
>> People get angry and post all kinds of crap about one another. I
>> won't stand in judgment of them outside of having my personal
>> opinion, whether flawed or not. I'm just another poster in this group
>> and I give my opinions. Feel free to disparage them, if you will. We
>> all have that right. If I've missed some important info, please
>> send it along and I'll read it. I might well change my mind about my
>> own words. But until I see what you are referring to, I can't know
>> why I need change. Thanks,
>> Cabbi
>>
>> PS I had a look at the Kook Faq and found it to be egregiously rife
>> with personal observations and attacks, as if this "information" was
>> true. It IS more editorial, with little support for the assertions it
>> makes. In short, it's no more worthy of being called "truth" than any
>> of my opinion pieces.
>
>How are you in any position to decide that anything I've written in the
>Kook Faq is inaccurate when at the same time you claim you don't know
>what's going on here? You want more documentation? Clearly, no amount of
>documentation is going to satisfy you because you've just rejected all
>of the documentation I already provided.
>
Hey anyone can take a bunch of selected quotes out of context of a
larger multi-threaded conversation and portray them anyway they want.

>Thing is, you can ignore everything I say in the Kook Faq. The quotes
>tell the story quite well without any commentary. You can see Rosie and
>LC bragging about turning me in to the DEA. You can see where OG said of
>me, "He's the man for blackmarket drugs and kiddie porn" and said I was
>a "junkie." You can see quotes that demonstrate ZW's "enabling"
>behavior. Did I make that stuff up? Of course not. Did I lie about what
>it means? Of course not.
>
I have not, I repeat have not, enabled you to traffic in black market
drugs or Kiddie Porn.

>And you don't need any Kook faq to know that Morton has been stalking
>Jite for 20 years. Every time Jite posts, Morton answers with the same
>tired crap. You don't need any Kook faq to know that Holland is a
>stalker who dogs my posts and brags constantly about all the things he
>knows about my personal and professional business. The evidence of that
>is posted here every day.
>
Are you sure it is twenty years. Do you have independently reviewed
documentation from a disinterested third party, or simply Jite's word
on it. Do you know the exact start date and when the annual
anniversary of said actions is?

I don't need your Kook FAQ to know that you annoyed the living ***
out of Paul and where given more then fair warning what the end
results of your decision to continue in your chosen path either.

>Your problem is not ignorance, Cabbi. It's dishonesty.
>
That is quo a bit of projection.
--

December 9, 2005 (CNN) While interviewing an anonymous
US Special Forces soldier, a Reuters News agent asked
the soldier what he felt when sniping members of Al Quaeda
in Afghanistan.

The soldier shrugged and replied, "Recoil." (Possible Urban Legend)
.