redrum wrote:

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 09:50:22 -0400,dxAce wrote:



redrum wrote:

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 06:57:42 -0400,dxAce wrote:



redrum wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 14:00:31 -0400,dxAce wrote:



redrum wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 12:34:17 -0400,dxAce wrote:



m II wrote:

dxAce wrote:

The Pentagon has reissued its Dictionary of Military and Associated
Terms, featuring 736 pages of definitions updated through March 23,
2004.

The Dictionary includes a limited amount of intelligence terminology,
but no military slang.

Many in the US military indeed DO have a limited amount intelligence, so
it would seem appropriate that the terminology used is adapted to this
reality. Slang would just befuddle these would-be torturers. It was best
left out.

Don't look now... but you forgot to put the word 'of' in your first
sentence.

Don't look now but you are too stupid for words.

Then how did you manage to string a few of them together, 'tard?

As you've proven with your answer, you can hardly form a sentence
yourself.

But I did, didn't I, 'tard?

Just because you start your string of words with a capital and end it
with a period or question mark does not mean it's a sentence, stupid.

I guess you and I have a difference of opinion on what contitutes a sentence, 'tard!

There is no "opinion" on what constitutes a sentence, stupid.

There must be, 'tard. Because you disagree with what my 'opinion' is.

There
are rules that spell out how a sentence is formed not opinions,
stupid.

OK, 'tard, tell me what rules I may have broken.



As you've proven with your answer, you can hardly form a sentence
yourself.

Perhaps, but form them I do, 'tard.

Attempting to correct someone else when your own grasp of
the English language is severely limited reinforces my opinion that
you are too stupid for words. I repeat,

Don't look now but you are too stupid for words.

You're pretty repetitive.