| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
November 9th 04, 05:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , (N2EY) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (William) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Len Over 21) writes: In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: Jimmie got as far as looking up Bear bombers in some book. Naw, just the Internet. Found out they weren't a threat to Len when he was in Japan. Sunuvagun! Tsk. You seem to be saying there were NO Soviet bombers in range of Japan in the 1950s? That's wrong (again), Leonard. He is saying that Soviet "Bear" bombers could not have been a threat to you during your military service in Japan, despite what you indicated here. As with your well known "Sphincter Post", it leads some of us to question your character. The bile on rrap comes from the three-way Steve/Len/Wiliam whizzing contest. You all must get something from it, because you sure put a lot of effort into it. Tsk. Rev. Jim is readying another Sermon on the Antenna Mount? Jim states a fact. Don't you have an acceptable response? Rev. Jim "puts a lot of effort" into making SURE that all those he thinks need "corrections" get those "corrections!" QED. What has that to do with your whizzing contest? btw, Len, a little googling turned up the fun fact that Steve began calling you a putz back on August 6, 1999 - if not earlier. Of course you had previously made a habit of calling him "nursie" and other names, and referring to him by the wrong gender. Tsk. You are still being Judge and Jury via Google, aintfcha? :-) Jim is? Not at all, Leonard. Your archived words and the dates on which you posted them are archived. It is proof of your actions. In this case, things didn't happen the way you claim they did. When Rev. Jim runs out of arguments in the present, he MUST resort to Googling to "prove" something. ....and it looks like the Google archives of newsgroup posts did just that. The archive seems to prove that version of events is not correct. Jimmie thinks he can "win" some past arguments by repeating and rehashing OLD ones? When you start the "Jimmie" stuff, it is obvious that he has zapped you good. You made a recent statement and issued it as a factual account of something which took place. The trouble is, the Google archives say otherwise. Of course...if for no other reason that Jimmie Must Be Right in his own mind. Subject itself be damned, concentrate on defaming the opponent in order to "win." Tsk. Diversion on your part. If you didn't want to be batted around on this issue, you could have refrained from, "Well, HE started it". Perhaps you need to try some new techniques if you want him to stop. Ah...you must have run out of damp hankies to slap folk on the wrist as self-styled moderator! :-) When did it become Jim's job to regulate Steve? But I don't think you want him to stop. Doesn't really matter to me. There will ALWAYS be some yo-yo out there who can't argue a subject for squat and does the personal insult thing in order to "win an argument." :-) Those are alleasy marks. Plenty of them. :-) If anyone would know, you'd know. You don't want anyone else doing what you do. Dave K8MN |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS.... | General | |||
Threaded Mode
