Walter Williams: Empathy Versus Law
-
Ilíon wrote:
whinging about what a "meanie" I am
I stopped whinging around the age of five and the word meanie left my vocabulary a short time after. I have been watching the way you behave [online] and often thought that maybe there was some history which caused you to be 'victimised'. On reflection I have found that it is because you are a tw*t. Complete and utter c*nt even. I have now realised what drives other to reply to you. Any sentient being would quickly realise that you are troll who's lost his bridge. Homeless and caste astray if you will. It is unwise, foolish even, to feed your need. But it's a bit like drinking copious amounts - you know you shouldn't but you do it anyway. BTW. I have managed to procreate, as intended, and my offspring will be able to care for me as I old and infirm; maybe even incontinent. What about you? How do you expect your 'off the cuff' to care for you? There's alovely piece of grafiti which describes you; but I'll hold that back for another time.
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done.
williamnw wrote:
often thought that maybe there was some history which caused you to be 'victimised'.
The final straw for me was when I had to lead my younger brother and little sisters into an open sewer to protect them from a gang of four or five boys of about my age (my sisters would have been in 1st grade, my brother in 3rd, I in 5th[^] At ten he was already a coward, hiding in the sewers instead of standing up to kids he'd pissed off.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Oakman wrote:
Congratulations, You did something I thought was impossible: use Troy's username and "reason" in the same sentence (fragment) and not create an oxymoron.
-- so asserts the fool who pretends to be unable to grasp the meaning of 'tautology.'
Dumbo. I wasn't even involved in that little broohaha. You were getting the intellectual shit kicked out of you by those who were, so I just read and chortled. The only post I made that might have been memorable was: "You aren't hated, Troy, you are even disliked, no matter how hard you try. You are simply looked down upon. You are a poor pathetic creature, too dumb not to mix your sh*t in your hair just to get someone to point at you."
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
williamnw wrote:
often thought that maybe there was some history which caused you to be 'victimised'.
The final straw for me was when I had to lead my younger brother and little sisters into an open sewer to protect them from a gang of four or five boys of about my age (my sisters would have been in 1st grade, my brother in 3rd, I in 5th[^] At ten he was already a coward, hiding in the sewers instead of standing up to kids he'd pissed off.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Dumbo. I wasn't even involved in that little broohaha. You were getting the intellectual shit kicked out of you by those who were, so I just read and chortled. The only post I made that might have been memorable was: "You aren't hated, Troy, you are even disliked, no matter how hard you try. You are simply looked down upon. You are a poor pathetic creature, too dumb not to mix your sh*t in your hair just to get someone to point at you."
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
Dumbo. I wasn't even involved in that little broohaha.
-
Oakman wrote:
Dumbo. I wasn't even involved in that little broohaha.
Ilíon wrote:
What a liar you are!
I said, and I repeat, I had no part of the broohaha over the meaning of 'tautology.' I made it clear, in the same post where I pointed out your error, that I had chortled over the ass-kicking you were taking and quoted, word for word, one of my posts that you just linked to. Apparently, you are unable to understand simple declarative sentences. Considering the convoluted ungrammatical style of any post you make that ventures very far beyond posting a link, or cutting and pasting your betters' thoughts, I am not surprised. Stan also took part in that thread, but not in the argument over tautology. Do you hold him culpable as well? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Give it up, Troy, you are so far out of your depth, you've drowned and are food for the bottomfeeders. Personally, I'm tired of pissing all over you, so have fun playing with yourself.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
-
Ilíon wrote:
What a liar you are!
I said, and I repeat, I had no part of the broohaha over the meaning of 'tautology.' I made it clear, in the same post where I pointed out your error, that I had chortled over the ass-kicking you were taking and quoted, word for word, one of my posts that you just linked to. Apparently, you are unable to understand simple declarative sentences. Considering the convoluted ungrammatical style of any post you make that ventures very far beyond posting a link, or cutting and pasting your betters' thoughts, I am not surprised. Stan also took part in that thread, but not in the argument over tautology. Do you hold him culpable as well? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Give it up, Troy, you are so far out of your depth, you've drowned and are food for the bottomfeeders. Personally, I'm tired of pissing all over you, so have fun playing with yourself.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin
Oakman wrote:
I said, and I repeat, I had no part of the broohaha over the meaning of 'tautology.'
You were in it from the very beginning[^]; you were, in fact, the reason for the explicit thread on the matter. You're intellectually dishonest. I don't see what your problem is with admitting it: we all know it, we all know that you're not ashamed to demonstrate it. What are you so shy about owning it?
-
Oakman wrote:
I said, and I repeat, I had no part of the broohaha over the meaning of 'tautology.'
You were in it from the very beginning[^]; you were, in fact, the reason for the explicit thread on the matter. You're intellectually dishonest. I don't see what your problem is with admitting it: we all know it, we all know that you're not ashamed to demonstrate it. What are you so shy about owning it?
-
You do realise that the link you provided proves that Oakman came in after the matter was pointed out? And that the next thread started which refers to that link was started by you?