tying knots

"Tim Carter" wrote in message
...

"Wolfgang" wrote in message
...

"Tim Carter" wrote in message
...

At the risk of sounding like Wolfgang...

DO trust me on this one, Timmy......that ain't going to happen.

Wolfgang

On that point I'll happily trust you....

Then you've learned something in the last ten hours. Today is GOOD day.

Wolfgang
who, it must be admitted, is a GOOD teacher.

"Tom Littleton" wrote in message
...

Got no beef with you Tom, so despite your bull**** post I'll just say your
opinion is noted. Small point: Your notion that a person's writing can not
be empirical evidence is pretty bizarre.

Dave

"Wolfgang" wrote in message
...


Classic Wolfgang word salad. . . alas SNIPPED.

Dave

"David Snedeker" wrote in message
...

"Tom Littleton" wrote in message
...

Got no beef with you Tom, so despite your bull**** post I'll just say your
opinion is noted. Small point: Your notion that a person's writing can not
be empirical evidence is pretty bizarre.

And yours that it is empirical evidence of whatever you want it to be is as
stupid as it is disingenuous.........pretty tough
trick......congratulations.

Wolfgang

"David Snedeker" wrote in message
...

"Wolfgang" wrote in message
...


Classic Wolfgang word salad. . . alas SNIPPED.

One would think that someone who chooses to make a career of surrendering
would at least have enough pride and self respect to learn to do it
eloquently. Well.....one can be wrong after all.

Wolfgang
who, while he likes children, still has trouble understanding them
sometimes.

"Wayne Harrison" wrote in message
. com...

"David Snedeker" wrote

do you really think i am trying to "trick" you? i am simply trying to
trace a conclusion to its source.


Of course not, but it in disingenous for you to deny that the pattern of
your question was objective.


But, no Wayne, Richard hasn't
shown at any clave Ive been to. I just know him from his posts/threats
and
a
little long distance research of public sources.

that's really not very convincing, imho. you might want to flesh that
out with some explanation of what you mean by "long distance research of
public sources".

Why don't you ask Richard directly?

well, i have concluded that you have made several claims about a man
that i don't believe are founded in reality.


Look Wayne, I judge the nature and the seriousness of who and what I
consider threats to me. Not you. You and I may share certain aesthetic and
recreational interests, but we most certainly have different experience
bases for deciding who is dangerous and how we shall chose to interact with
them. In my opinion the man is a dangerous whackjob as per my posts. And I
do not value such folk very highly. Everyone doesn't have your brand of
apparent tolerance for the RDean's of this world, nor do all of us subscribe
to the notion that Rattlesnakes are innocent till they bite.

Dave

Dave wrote:
Got no beef with you Tom, so despite your bull**** post I'll just say your
opinion is noted. Small point: Your notion that a person's writing can not
be empirical evidence is pretty bizarre.

my "Huh?" was to indicate the question,
"evidence of what?". What would one make, for instance, of your tirades last
night? I just don't see this sinister stuff out of Dean's writings. I see
someone with a sense of humor, and some live targets.
Tom

"Wolfgang" wrote in message
...



Classic Wolfgang word salad. . . alas SNIPPED.

One would think that someone who chooses to make a career of surrendering
would at least have enough pride and self respect to learn to do it
eloquently. Well.....one can be wrong after all.

Wolfgang
who, while he likes children, still has trouble understanding them
sometimes.


You lose everytime you post asshole.
Dave

"David Snedeker" wrote in message
...

"Wayne Harrison" wrote in message
. com...

"David Snedeker" wrote

do you really think i am trying to "trick" you? i am simply trying
to
trace a conclusion to its source.


Of course not, but it in disingenous for you to deny that the pattern of
your question was objective.

my question was, indeed, objective. so is this entire exercise. but i
don't see that as a bad thing.




Look Wayne, I judge the nature and the seriousness of who and what I
consider threats to me. Not you. You and I may share certain aesthetic
and
recreational interests, but we most certainly have different experience
bases for deciding who is dangerous and how we shall chose to interact
with
them. In my opinion the man is a dangerous whackjob as per my posts. And
I
do not value such folk very highly. Everyone doesn't have your brand of
apparent tolerance for the RDean's of this world, nor do all of us
subscribe
to the notion that Rattlesnakes are innocent till they bite.

Dave

i understand, dave. thanks for keeping this process civil. i just
believe that you might be overreacting to the raoul persona when you respond
to richard's posts. and i continue to remind my friends that similarities
in political ideologies should be irrelevant to the formation, and
maintenance, of friendships.

yfitons
wayno

"Tom Littleton" wrote in message
...
...I see...live targets.

Well......for the moment.

ROFF is like one of those movies where people keep disappearing one at a
time until there's only two left.......um......gulp......sorta like you and
me and.......uh......OH GOD!......WHAT'S THA.......aaaaaaargggggghhhh!

Wolfgang
who knows that the only thing keeping dementia from being sad is the fact
that it's funny.