Cujo DeSockpuppet wrote:

Kali wrote in
:

In , Cujo
DeSockpuppet said:
: K. A. Cannon wrote in
: :
:
: On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 00:38:17 +0000 (UTC), Cujo DeSockpuppet
: wrote:
:
: Kali wrote in
: m:
:
: In , miguel mjc101
: @gmail.com said:

[...]

: Yeah? You forgot to tell Foamboi.
:
: Maybe he can make his threats to me personally too!!
:
: Tell the nutless ****wit you're female. It brings out the bestest
: k00ky threats in mikey.
:
: Scare me, mikey!
:
: add me to ur lits mikey!!
:
: Day-yum, I hace been teh litsiest! Thanks for reminding moi!

Lits whores, the both of you.

It's not how many times you've been litsed, it's how many *recently*.

Ahem -- I've been on all the recent G-dolf lits.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"To err is human, to cover it up is Weasel" -- Dogbert

On Mar 16, 5:42 pm, Sean Monaghan wrote:
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote :

Life-threatening?

Any type of a beating that requires hospitalisation is potentially
life-threatening.

Human beings are terribly fragile. You can avoid inflicting death
fairly
reliably by concentrating on the extremities: knees, feet, fingers,
arms
and legs. If Mike has been practicing martial arts for all this time
it is likely
that he is able to inflict a beating upon an unarmed opponent without
killing him or endangering his life. Of course, this would be bad
practice.

It is quite likely that if such a confrontation escalated into fatal
violence
it would be because of the introduction of a weapon by the alleged
victim, Mr. Chaney who has made no secret of his love of guns.

Crash Street Kidd

The Original Demon Prince of Absurdity
wrote in
news
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:04:36 -0700, miguel did the cha-cha, and
screamed:
Sean Monaghan wrote:
miguel wrote:
Kali wrote:
miguel said:
: Kadaitcha Gimp Retard He-Bitch wrote: Translation: even though
: all kookologists agree that taking usenet to real life is prime
: kooksign, that's what I'm trying to accomplish.
: Good job there kOOk. miguel So, what are your plans for Steve
: Cheney? If I ever meet him, I will put him in the hospital.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^

This is not a flame; this is a clear threat of physical violence.
This is something we'd expect from Richard "the St00pid" Bullis, or
from Edmond Heinz Wollmann - not the words of a 'marginal kook', or
from someone who is merely involved in a Usenet flamewar.

Sean, Kali recently stated that she was considered the most reasonable
and judicious of the kookologists. If by that she is contrasting
herself with you, K-Bitch and ****stain, you can imagine the
difficulty I or anybody else might have in giving her any points for
that claim.

You have no idea of the extent to which Steve Chaney has taken matters
to RL over the past 12 years wrt me, and you have no idea of the
extent to which his raging insanity has caused him to make unspeakably
nasty claims about my children and my grandchild.

Who cares? This is usenet.

Did you read the first sentence? When matters are taken into real life, why
is it so unreasonable to respond in real life? Miguel has merely written
on usenet what he would like to do in real life in response to what someone
has done to him in real life.

This whole "it's only words on a screen" is hogwash because it neglects any
context. It's not such a black and white issue. An appropriate response
depends on what those words are, and whose screen on which they appear. For
example, what if those words happen to contain numbers as well, such as a
SSN and credit card information, and those words appear on the screen of
identity thieves? Have a read on this identify theft victims story and then
tell me that Miguel or any other kook on your list deserves a similar fate?
What if the "words on a screen" are a complete fabrication and appear the
the screen of your employer, or if you're self employeed, potential
customers.

Words on a screen can have real life impact, and to categorically label
someone as a kook because he/she writes on usenet what he would like to do
in real life, is absurd. IMHO, the fact that Miguel has been busting the
balls and trolling kookologist with great succes is the only reason that
he's been nominated for one of your infantile awards.

On Mar 16, 9:07 pm, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" wrote:
"Kali" wrote in message







In , Rhonda Lea Kirk
said:
"Kali" wrote in message
m
In , miguel mjc101
@gmail.com said:
Dumbarse Git wrote:
miguel:

Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside:

You bitched about KM repeating your purported occupation (which
you admit to in another thread), yet it falls within your code of
ethics to post the (alleged) institution and precise location of
someone else.

I'm reading a lecture on ethics from Sean Monaghan, who moments ago
said that it's all about the entertainment. Will somebody please
nominate you for some steaming pile of hypocrisy award? I'm
beginning to think that your intellectual prowess is about the
equivalent of ****stain's, which would be your only defense to said
award.

If Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside,
Department of Psychology is going to associate my name and
occupation with the word "dog****er," given that she stated she
has no trouble with somebody's name being associated with their
posts on usenet, then where's the problem? Of course, all she
needs to do to avoid this is cease her participation in the google
stacking. If you are her friend, you might think about stopping
yourself.

Thank you for this very telling campaign speech.

You are a dolt. In part, though, she has you to thank for this,
what with the fanboi page you did for me. ****stain, too. If you
all want to stop the RL stuff, I'm happy to stop too. Your choice.

The question is - will your public defender find this behaviour to
be acceptable, or will that person continue to rationalise on your
behalf?

It's sad that you dismiss it as rationalization.

miguel

I didn't mention your full name or your occupation (let alone
your work location), you filthy kook.

You have serious reading comprehension problems. I've explained
my position on this very well, and I maintain that position. I
merely cited an example to make a point. You, being the kooky
bully you are, saw a threat in it and decided you were going to
do the same thing, only turn it up a notch. That's what
narcissistic kooks do.

The more you write, the kookier you seem. You're so bent on your
kooky mission that you're willing to drag Rhonda through hell
for it. Say what you want, and have Rhonda try to defend you,
but kooky is as kooky does. This post is just another example.

He's not responsible for my choices.

His transparent manipulation of you aside...

He was a friend to me when I was being batted around like a cat toy, and
auk was giving out an undeserved Salinger for a troll that did me a lot
of emotional damage.

He has not withdrawn his friendship even though I was quite critical of
him with regard to his initial flaming of you.

Everything he has done with regard to /me/ has been done to my benefit
and advantage. If that's manipulation, I want more of it.

Some of these people need to grow up. Miguel does behave badly on
occasion but you need to look the "threats" and flaming in context.
If you are going to go after uninvolved family members, then you
can expect that people will bear animosity toward the author of
those tactics as Miguel does towards Steve.

Those of you whining about miguel's tactics of outing your real
names need to stop doing it to him. From here it looks like
all the unholy howling is hypocritical.

I have been on the receiving and sending end of justified and
unjustified attacks by and on Miguel in the past but I got over it.
You
should get over it too.

I respect him now. HTH.

Crash Street Kidd

John Fereira wrote:
The Original Demon Prince of ****stain:
Miguel:

snip

You have no idea of the extent to which Steve Chaney has taken matters
to RL over the past 12 years wrt me, and you have no idea of the
extent to which his raging insanity has caused him to make unspeakably
nasty claims about my children and my grandchild.

Who cares? This is usenet.

Did you read the first sentence? When matters are taken into real life, why
is it so unreasonable to respond in real life? Miguel has merely written
on usenet what he would like to do in real life in response to what someone
has done to him in real life.

This whole "it's only words on a screen" is hogwash because it neglects any
context. It's not such a black and white issue. An appropriate response
depends on what those words are, and whose screen on which they appear. For
example, what if those words happen to contain numbers as well, such as a
SSN and credit card information, and those words appear on the screen of
identity thieves? Have a read on this identify theft victims story and then
tell me that Miguel or any other kook on your list deserves a similar fate?
What if the "words on a screen" are a complete fabrication and appear the
the screen of your employer, or if you're self employeed, potential
customers.

Words on a screen can have real life impact, and to categorically label
someone as a kook because he/she writes on usenet what he would like to do
in real life, is absurd. IMHO, the fact that Miguel has been busting the
balls and trolling kookologist with great succes is the only reason that
he's been nominated for one of your infantile awards.

John, as usual, I agree with your analysis completely. Unfortunately,
the sick freaks who populate AUK probably aren't going to credit the
word of a usenet newbie such as you.

Miguel

Crash Street Kidd wrote:
Rhonda Lea Kirk:
Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, wrote:
Rhonda Lea Kirk said:
Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, wrote:
miguel said:
Dumbarse Git wrote:
miguel:
Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside:
You bitched about KM repeating your purported occupation (which
you admit to in another thread), yet it falls within your code of
ethics to post the (alleged) institution and precise location of
someone else.
I'm reading a lecture on ethics from Sean Monaghan, who moments ago
said that it's all about the entertainment. Will somebody please
nominate you for some steaming pile of hypocrisy award? I'm
beginning to think that your intellectual prowess is about the
equivalent of ****stain's, which would be your only defense to said
award.
If Kimberly K. Barnard, University of Wisconsin-Parkside,
Department of Psychology is going to associate my name and
occupation with the word "dog****er," given that she stated she
has no trouble with somebody's name being associated with their
posts on usenet, then where's the problem? Of course, all she
needs to do to avoid this is cease her participation in the google
stacking. If you are her friend, you might think about stopping
yourself.
Thank you for this very telling campaign speech.
You are a dolt. In part, though, she has you to thank for this,
what with the fanboi page you did for me. ****stain, too. If you
all want to stop the RL stuff, I'm happy to stop too. Your choice.
The question is - will your public defender find this behaviour to
be acceptable, or will that person continue to rationalise on your
behalf?
It's sad that you dismiss it as rationalization.
I didn't mention your full name or your occupation (let alone
your work location), you filthy kook.
You have serious reading comprehension problems. I've explained
my position on this very well, and I maintain that position. I
merely cited an example to make a point. You, being the kooky
bully you are, saw a threat in it and decided you were going to
do the same thing, only turn it up a notch. That's what
narcissistic kooks do.
The more you write, the kookier you seem. You're so bent on your
kooky mission that you're willing to drag Rhonda through hell
for it. Say what you want, and have Rhonda try to defend you,
but kooky is as kooky does. This post is just another example.
He's not responsible for my choices.
His transparent manipulation of you aside...

In the mind of Kimberly K. Barnard, Ph.D, University of
Wisconsin-Parkside, Department of Psychology, treating somebody with
some empathy, and not being defensive when they are critical of you, is
transparent manipulation. What kind of a sick mother****er are you,
Kimberly K. Barnard?

He was a friend to me when I was being batted around like a cat toy, and
auk was giving out an undeserved Salinger for a troll that did me a lot
of emotional damage.

He has not withdrawn his friendship even though I was quite critical of
him with regard to his initial flaming of you.

Everything he has done with regard to /me/ has been done to my benefit
and advantage. If that's manipulation, I want more of it.

Some of these people need to grow up. Miguel does behave badly on
occasion but you need to look the "threats" and flaming in context.
If you are going to go after uninvolved family members, then you
can expect that people will bear animosity toward the author of
those tactics as Miguel does towards Steve.

Those of you whining about miguel's tactics of outing your real
names need to stop doing it to him. From here it looks like
all the unholy howling is hypocritical.

I have been on the receiving and sending end of justified and
unjustified attacks by and on Miguel in the past but I got over it.
You should get over it too.

I respect him now. HTH.

Thanks. Most of them are flaming hypocrites, but are so immersed in
their sociopathic culture that they can't even see it. There are a few
who are plainly stupid, so they get a pass for hypocrisy for that reason.

miguel

miguel wrote:

In th

Shuttup, Cranston.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"To err is human, to cover it up is Weasel" -- Dogbert

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:07:50 -0600, Art Deco sat in thee Comfee Chaire,
and didst finally confess, after taking Muche Tea:
miguel wrote:

In th

Shuttup, Cranston.
Shuttup, Cranston.

--
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Hail Eris!
Demon Prince of Absurdity; COOSN-029-06-71069
"Lola Stonewall Riot" is not part of my email addy.

Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle
Trainer of PorchMonkey4Life
http://www.screedbomb.info/porchie/

AUK FAQ: http://www.caballista.org/auk/faq.html

WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, February 2007
Message-ID: 1

WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, January 2007 MID:
70

"Hey Theophan, I need your help again. Will you please come assist me
again? aggreen is after me again. He has been after me for a year and
counting now. I want you to destroy his character for me. I can't do
it." -- Olympiada: Not too proud to beg for help when it comes to
character assassination, and Mistress of the Bleeding Obvious.
MID:

"I think we have taken care of the net.KKKopping in alt.gothic. Could
all the kookologists trim alt.gothic from their headers and leave us
alone now? It has gone on long enough. I can take care of myself in there
from here on out. Thanks. I know how to fight off trolls now. Thank you
for the education." -- Olympiada thinks she's had an education, and that
means it's time for those nice kookologists to go away and leave her
sandbox alone now, in MID:

"Who booby-traps a dead end? That's just not right." -- Cordelia

Are you the Peter J Ross that I've heard so much about?

Probably. I'm the one who doesn't resort to forgery after losing an
argument.

"You're the one with the extensive brain damage... okay I see. You're
gonna be easily to own them." -- PorchMonkey4Life: Not aware of too many
things. MID: bf7xh.834$hH2.64@trnddc02

At last! See Joxer The Mity Monkey on camera! Watch him freak out!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_WuaENGqz0

"And no, I did not have sex with my son. But if I did I certainly
wouldn't tell you. Something so beautiful and precious should be kept
private." -- Kathy L. Mosesian, or possibly not really her, confesses
she may be a liar and committer of incest with her own son, in MID:
emailer.net

The reporter asked Colin Powell (or George Bush), "What proof do you
have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction?"
He replied, "We kept the receipts." -- Bill Hicks

Looney Maroon nominee for August 2006 Johnny D Wentzky foamed:
"You never asked someone who goes into areas of the internet that are
only for adults who has an underage id somehow or another if they are a
cop posing as an underage person online?
I guess lots of people just don't watch dateline or read stories much.
Why don;t you go to pervertedjustice,com and see what they do. They are
awash in their self-proclaimed glory after they lied to membners of the
public.
They are awash in their self-proclaimed glory after they posed as an
underage person and agreed to do all sorts of sex acts wioth adult
males, and they are adults posing as teenager themselves. They make
themsleves into liars by falsely impersonating underage persons and by
not fuilfilling the words they tell the victims online in their chats.
Why don't you read it where they tell these victims of their deceit
about how they have been with grown men and such? Why don't you read it
where they say, "That would be cool." after someone makes an advance
towards an adult who is posing as a teenager? And, where they agree to
meet the person, etc.
Lost control, didn't you?
Is that why you feel as if you need to lie so much now? I see where lots
of these false impersonation games are not sticking. They feel as if
they can lie and then order the victims to get counseling in the
gayblade, governmental, pro-choice tax leech counseling centers. They
are doing nothing more than usury and fraud in many cases." -- Wentzky
almost comes out of the closet as a pedo/ephebophile in MID:

Teh Czar ov Awl Teh ****stains wrote:
miguel:
The Original Demon Prince of ****stain wrote:
miguel:

You have no idea of the extent to which Steve Chaney has taken matters
to RL over the past 12 years wrt me, and you have no idea of the extent
to which his raging insanity has caused him to make unspeakably nasty
claims about my children and my grandchild.

BTW, all of that **** from Steve was foam, and you ought to have just
totted up your Usenet Valhalla points. Instead, you went to K00k
Valhalla along with Steve.

Since you are unaware of all that Steve wrote, your opinion about this is
as useless as your employment prospects, gimp.

So? I'm not aware of everything you've written, either, but I still
think you're a k00k, just like Chaney.

You seem incapable of carrying a train of thought beyond more than a
post or two. Is that the disability that keeps you on welfare in Canada,
or is it something else?

miguel

`.