Re: Are you now, or have you ever been, a troll?

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:40:30 -0800, Curly Surmudgeon
<Curly.is.not@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:41:56 -0500, Li RM wrote:

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 00:08:29 -0800, Curly Surmudgeon
<Curly.is.not@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 23:46:53 -0500, Li RM wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:03:10 -0800, Curly Surmudgeon
<Curly.is.not@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:39:23 -0500, Li RM wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:46:45 -0800, Curly Surmudgeon
<Curly.is.not@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:33:47 -0800, Gunner wrote:

------snipped lines of excuses-----

Only the President get the daily briefings and has deep access to
intelligence. Posting 100 lines of excuses about Democrats doesn't
excuse the failure of Bush.

Nor your treason for continuing to support a known liar.

More fucking horse*** from the liberal scumbags.

Hey Hypocrit, now point me to your posts telling us how Clinton was a
treasonous liar for bombing that Ibuprophen factory in the Sudan.

You won't and you can't because this isn't about some mythical ideals
you and your scum bag peer group live by.

It's about partisan politics.

You liberals are nothing more then sacks of ***.

Anarcho-libertarian my fucking ass.

In your dreams, pal...

A lot of erroneous assumptions designed to deflect Bush's war crimes,
lies, and Fascism.

If you want ot see those postings feel free to visit "uncensored.com"
and ask the sysop for his archive records. They're there even though
you've convinced yourself otherwise. I used this handle on that bbs so
just look for this name during that chronological period.

You can also go to "well.com" in the late 80's and early 90's to see my
opposition to Clinton even before he took office.

I asked to see your specific posts on a specific topic. Provide a link
to

You can ask but I'm not going to do your research for you. In fact I was
banned from "Uncensored" for a riot with the sysop and his aides over his
censoring posts. About half his user base left in protest.

your posts calling Clinton a "treasonous liar" and you'll
happily get my
apology.

I pushed for impeachment proceedings against Clinton over his sale of
submarine propeller technology to China. That was his beggest crime, how
many people remember now? Or that Hillary is in bed ith the chinese?

Not one of the Bob's has been able to do so.

I suspect you - the first anarchist I've had the displeasure to meet -
won't be able to do it either. Unless of course every leader since
Lincoln you consider a treasonous liar which would make this entire
exercise a moot point since that would mean you stand for absolutely
fucking nothing.

I'm not here to meet your standards but don't be such an *** to
characterize me so flippantly. Especially when you evade equal scrutiny.

I'm not sure if you count these scumbags as your peers,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecp8ZCC3tB8

- but it seems entirely like that's the case since you parrot their
calls of fascism. If so, you are the most disgusting revolting rat
*** *** I have yet to meet on Usenet.

*** you very much. I don't do video/html/gui unless there is an
overwhelming need. My server has been up since 1999 without a security
penetration. I run OpenBSD firewall with linux desktops and rarely fire
up a windowing environment.

You mean to tell me you're *proud* of the fact that you're too frightened
to go anywhere or do much of anything on the 'net - yet you consider this
a keen implementation of security?

Stop with the misrepresentation already. I'm more educated on these
issues than you will ever be so quit making *** up to attack me.

That remains to be seen.

Got a reasonable answer to the question instead of just evading it?


<cough>

Good job.

I think Bruce Schneier called this "Security by Shriveled Nuts".

Do you try and implement this solution for clients or do you just tell
them to string two paper cups together for comms...

Let's be clear here. Is it your intention to continue misrepresenting me?
Are you intent on creating enemies, both personal and ideologically? What
is your purpose here? I am not going to continue responding rationally to
a sociopath.

Because someone tosses a little sarcasm at you, you call them a
sociopath?

And who put you in charge of deciding which writing styles are
appropriate for Usenet?


So tell me Mr. Anarchist - do you stand with the pieces of *** in
the above video or is that where your "libertarianism" jumps in to
save you

that's "Mr. Surmudgeon" to you. I have no idea what you refer to since
I'm not going to load KDE or Gnome for one flick. Is there any pink in
it?

Just the pink that's emblematic of cowardly anarchists like you who burn
US soldiers in effigy but wouldn't have the fucking nuts to try the same
on the live version.

This is the last time I will give you any slack. Your continuous attacks
are uncalled for, unproductive, and polarize those of us in the rational
middle. I am a true conservative, not a right wing wacko, and will call
you out as well as the extreme left.

This week you're a true conservative. Last week you were a
"anarcho-libertarian".

Which is it?


I shant continue responding to your goads. By attacking me you
submarine your own position by demonstrating only your closed mind and
uncompromising attitude of those with your political slant.

I asked you to view a simple video of what your *possible* peers did
out in Seattle. You wouldn't for reasons that are you're own.

In a nutshell I just summarized for it for you. You put yourself in
the category along with the anarchists, not me and I drew a likely
parallel based on both you and them referring to the current
administration as fascists.

And why is it OK for you to attack me with accusations of posting a
link to porn (which was silly given the context of the link) and it's
not OK for you get tossed a little sarcastic humor to make a point?

Pot, kettle, black, Curly.


You don't know me yet seem anxious to make *** up then attribute it to
me. Then you expect me to defend against your straw men. That is
obviously deceitful and I will not spend my precious time dispelling your
bull***. Either engage me honestly or I'll treat you as a troll.

You can treat me however you see fit to treat me, but I assure you the
points and questions I put to you both plainly and sarcastically in
this thread were serious.

You can now take up where we left off and try to address them.

Or not.

It seems you purposely are avoiding doing exactly that, so no - I
don't expect you to review this and answer a one.

But feel free to attack me some more because I tossed a little bit of
sarcasm your way.

Maybe you should go back to playing with Tonka trucks out in the
sandbox if this seems a tad too much for you.

One final note:

The video link I posted for your review contains some of the most
despicable footage I have ever laid my eyes on. To burn US soldiers
in effigy - the very men and women who give these sniveling little
pieces of dog*** the right to do what they do - I consider treasonous
- and were it up to me - I would put those fucks in front of a firing
squad - or give them the option of being tossed out of a C-130 over
North Western Pakistan to see how well they fare there.

If that truly is your peer group, then yes, most certainly we are
enemies.

Your call on whether or not you want to view it.

And try tossing a virtual machine (http://www.vmware.com/products/ws/)
up on a spare box somewhere on your LAN if you think the mere thought
of viewing a vid is going to give the rest of your machines cooty's.
Or pull the vid off as an .flv using any number of extraction sites so
you don't have to tread where evil lives.

That wasn't sarcasm by the way - they are two viable options.


Again, what is your purpose here?

Now show me where you resisted Bush's fascism.

Polly want a cracker...

See, this is why I consider you almost at troll. I've entertained your
inquiries yet you come damned close to calling me a liar and evaded teh
one simple question put to you.

Then return and apologize for your attack and assumptions.

Time to apologize...

It's time to apologize.

--Regards, Curly
=============================================================================
http://tinyurl.com/nrqzw
=============================================================================
.

Loading