K4YZ wrote:
Hello Everyone,

In the thread about " Selling 52 Simplex Radios", the following
comments were made by Mike Coslo, "Rabbi Phil" and myself:

QUOTE:


Michael Coslo wrote:
Rabbi Phil wrote:
My friend Lennie Schwartz owns a radio store and was stuck with
close
to a hundred 52 simplex radios he could not sell. As his Rabbi &
chief
Sanhedrin, Lennie asked me for advice. Now Lennie has three
gorgeous
college-age daughters, so I had Lennie get them some cute little
outfits,
tight tops and tight short-shorts, similar to what the Hooters
girls wear.
We had the following message boldly printed on the butt end of
the
shorts
and across the bust area of the tops:

"I MONITOR 52 SIMPLEX"


In less that 24 hours, Lennie sold all his 52 simplex radios at
five times
the
original asking price and had to order more. Every male ham of
any

age swamped Lennie's radio store and demanded a 52 simplex radio.


NOTE FOR HANS: It is not the message that is so important, as
how
you
communicate the message.

The only thing worse than being witty is not being witty.

Come on, you can do better! 8^)

Hey Mike...It's not THAT far fetched...Burghardt in NY has had
that
young lady in the tight fitting sweater for years...Musta beem
selling
SOMEthing!

But not radios, huh???

UNQUOTE:

So...later this morning I received a private e-mail from one of
RRAP'S regular posters.

I have snipped the person's name, call sign and e mail headers
since the letter was sent in private e-mail. However the e-mail made
some very damning comments and a not-so-subtle threat.

QUOTE:

In rrap Steve Robeson wrote:

Burghardt in NY has had that
young lady in the tight fitting sweater
for years...Musta beem selling SOMEthing!

73

Steve, K4YZ

Burghardt Amateur Center is not in NY. It's a family business which
was established by Stan Burghardt, W0IT (SK) 68 years ago in a small
South Dakota town.

A few years ago one of Stan's long-time employees, Jim Smith W0MJY,
purchased the business from Stan and became the second owner. It
remains a family owned business, and the lady you mention is Jim's
daughter, Michele, KC0MYV, a wholesome midwesterner who is very
active
in running the "business side" of the store. Often she is pictured
standing alongside her dad in their QST ads, never in my knowledge in
a
provocative sweater.

The sleazy nudge-nudge insinuation in your "Musta beem seeling
SOMEthing!" comment is one of the lowest forms of attack I've ever
seen
on rrap.

Not really, but it is true to Steve's style.

I'll expect to see a sincere unconditional apology on rrap by
the end of today, or I'll consider forwarding your trashy comments to
Michele and Jim.

Unlikely.

UNQUOTE

Here's my response to this "letter", made in a very public forum
so
that the correspondant can't make any other assinine insinuations or
out-of-context editorializing:

(1) I stand corrected on the South Dakota -vs- New York. My
bust.

(2) I am sure the young lady is very good at what she does, and
is every bit the "wholesome" person you report. I NEVER said
anything
to the contrary. You are welcome to cite the part of the post
wherein
I said differently, but you and I both know it's not there.

(3) The young lady's character and wholesomeness
notwithstanding,
THEY obviously had NO PROBLEM in posing her in a tight sweater,
profile, in order to attract some male attention to thier ads.
"Rabbi
Phil" commented about someone else "selling radios" with pictures of
pretty women. I pointed out that another Amateur dealer had been
doing
the same thing, and obviously it worked. Pictures of pretty women
sell
everything from soft drinks to firearms to high speed automobiles.
Amateur Radio is no different. No problem.

Now, Dear Anonymous Writer (anonymous HERE...since you and I
both
know who you are)...You can go RIGHT AHEAD and forward ANYthing you
like to ANY one you like. Tell them about "how trashy" the item was,
if you want, but it IS archived right ehre in Google.

You took offense...Too bad for you. You know as well as I do
that
people can "take offense" at the most innocent of comments
all-the-while letting morbid profanity and bold threats roll off
thier
backs. This is one of those moments.

Have a nice day.

Steve, K4YZ

Innocent comments - hi, hi! Robeson likes to make inuendo.

If you call him on it, he'll try to turn you into the deviant.

He's always the victim. Probably learned that tactic while rehearsing
for his 100% disability hearing.

bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

Hey Mike...It's not THAT far fetched...Burghardt in NY has had
that
young lady in the tight fitting sweater for years...Musta beem
selling
SOMEthing!

But not radios, huh???

Only radios.

You and the e-mailer have the same problem, Brain. A one-track,
race to evil conclusions minds.

Bad thing to have.

The sleazy nudge-nudge insinuation in your "Musta beem seeling
SOMEthing!" comment is one of the lowest forms of attack I've ever
seen
on rrap.

Not really, but it is true to Steve's style.

What style?

I'll expect to see a sincere unconditional apology on rrap by
the end of today, or I'll consider forwarding your trashy comments
to
Michele and Jim.

Unlikely.

Absolutely unlikely. The respondant was asked both here and in
private e-mail to show where an "attack" or an intent to attack was
expressed.

The respondant failed to do so...That being because there wasn't
one.

The "attack" was the respondant picking a fight with me for no
other reason than it WAS me making the comments.


You took offense...Too bad for you. You know as well as I do
that
people can "take offense" at the most innocent of comments
all-the-while letting morbid profanity and bold threats roll off
thier
backs. This is one of those moments.

Have a nice day.

Steve, K4YZ

Innocent comments - hi, hi! Robeson likes to make inuendo.

The "innuendo" was the respondants.

If you call him on it, he'll try to turn you into the deviant.

What's to "call", Brain?

He's always the victim.

Unlike you or Lennie who always have to be a victim, I REFUSE to be
a victim. That's probably what grates your cheese.

Probably learned that tactic while rehearsing for his 100% disability
hearing.

And there goes Brain with yet another lie that he'll never
substantiate.

Steve, K4YZ

Who is it?
Brain or Brian?

"there goes Brain with yet another lie..."

You really should get this right. If you don't, that oddball 'Not Roger'
miscreant will take you to task.

Of course nobody gives a healthy hoot what 'Not Roger' has to say. The guy
is a Bottom Feeder who ranks in the lower world of Nowhere.
Poor 'Not Roger' has been thrashing about in his own self-made cesspool
version of Purgatory for most of his adult life.

--
"The funny thing is, you don't know your fat ass from a whole in
the ground, ****-for-brains."
Roger Wiseman







"K4YZ" wrote in message
ups.com...
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

Hey Mike...It's not THAT far fetched...Burghardt in NY has had
that
young lady in the tight fitting sweater for years...Musta beem
selling
SOMEthing!

But not radios, huh???

Only radios.

You and the e-mailer have the same problem, Brain. A one-track,
race to evil conclusions minds.

Bad thing to have.

The sleazy nudge-nudge insinuation in your "Musta beem seeling
SOMEthing!" comment is one of the lowest forms of attack I've ever
seen
on rrap.

Not really, but it is true to Steve's style.

What style?

I'll expect to see a sincere unconditional apology on rrap by
the end of today, or I'll consider forwarding your trashy comments
to
Michele and Jim.

Unlikely.

Absolutely unlikely. The respondant was asked both here and in
private e-mail to show where an "attack" or an intent to attack was
expressed.

The respondant failed to do so...That being because there wasn't
one.

The "attack" was the respondant picking a fight with me for no
other reason than it WAS me making the comments.


You took offense...Too bad for you. You know as well as I do
that
people can "take offense" at the most innocent of comments
all-the-while letting morbid profanity and bold threats roll off
thier
backs. This is one of those moments.

Have a nice day.

Steve, K4YZ

Innocent comments - hi, hi! Robeson likes to make inuendo.

The "innuendo" was the respondants.

If you call him on it, he'll try to turn you into the deviant.

What's to "call", Brain?

He's always the victim.

Unlike you or Lennie who always have to be a victim, I REFUSE to be
a victim. That's probably what grates your cheese.

Probably learned that tactic while rehearsing for his 100% disability
hearing.

And there goes Brain with yet another lie that he'll never
substantiate.

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

Hey Mike...It's not THAT far fetched...Burghardt in NY has
had
that
young lady in the tight fitting sweater for years...Musta beem
selling
SOMEthing!

But not radios, huh???

Only radios.

Obviously "something" that radio sellers sell is radios.

So why make such an obvious statement?

You and the e-mailer have the same problem, Brain. A one-track,
race to evil conclusions minds.

Bad thing to have.

And so you try to make others the deviants. Isn't working.

The sleazy nudge-nudge insinuation in your "Musta beem seeling
SOMEthing!" comment is one of the lowest forms of attack I've
ever
seen
on rrap.

Not really, but it is true to Steve's style.

What style?

True enough in the usual sense.

I'll expect to see a sincere unconditional apology on rrap by
the end of today, or I'll consider forwarding your trashy
comments
to
Michele and Jim.

Unlikely.

Absolutely unlikely. The respondant was asked both here and in
private e-mail to show where an "attack" or an intent to attack was
expressed.

The respondant failed to do so...That being because there wasn't
one.

The "attack" was the respondant picking a fight with me for no
other reason than it WAS me making the comments.

I see no attack. (S)he asked you to apologize for an off comment. I
certainly have no problem with that person forwarding your comments to
the young lady and her father whether you apologize or not. You made
your comments in a public forum, right?

Maybe you'd like to have 30 minutes at the Dayton Hamvention banquet to
explain yourself, your view of how people are always misunderstanding
what you say, and why you are the victim.

You took offense...Too bad for you. You know as well as I
do
that
people can "take offense" at the most innocent of comments
all-the-while letting morbid profanity and bold threats roll off
thier
backs. This is one of those moments.

Have a nice day.

Steve, K4YZ

Innocent comments - hi, hi! Robeson likes to make inuendo.

The "innuendo" was the respondants.

If you call him on it, he'll try to turn you into the deviant.

What's to "call", Brain?

He's always the victim.

Unlike you or Lennie who always have to be a victim, I REFUSE to
be
a victim. That's probably what grates your cheese.

I am no victim of yours. You would have to matter for that to happen,
and you just don't matter. You simply have an emotional defect and you
cannot help yourself.

Probably learned that tactic while rehearsing for his 100%
disability
hearing.

And there goes Brain with yet another lie that he'll never
substantiate.

Steve, K4YZ

So you're not disabled?

bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

Hey Mike...It's not THAT far fetched...Burghardt in NY has
had
that
young lady in the tight fitting sweater for years...Musta beem
selling
SOMEthing!

But not radios, huh???

Only radios.

Obviously "something" that radio sellers sell is radios.

So why make such an obvious statement?

You and the e-mailer have the same problem, Brain. A
one-track,
race to evil conclusions minds.

Bad thing to have.

And so you try to make others the deviants. Isn't working.

I don't make anyone anything, Brian. I may hold a mirror up to
them, but anything they "are" is of thier own doing.

The sleazy nudge-nudge insinuation in your "Musta beem seeling
SOMEthing!" comment is one of the lowest forms of attack I've
ever
seen
on rrap.

Not really, but it is true to Steve's style.

What style?

True enough in the usual sense.

I'll expect to see a sincere unconditional apology on rrap by
the end of today, or I'll consider forwarding your trashy
comments
to
Michele and Jim.

Unlikely.

Absolutely unlikely. The respondant was asked both here and in
private e-mail to show where an "attack" or an intent to attack was
expressed.

The respondant failed to do so...That being because there
wasn't
one.

The "attack" was the respondant picking a fight with me for no
other reason than it WAS me making the comments.

I see no attack. (S)he asked you to apologize for an off comment. I
certainly have no problem with that person forwarding your comments
to
the young lady and her father whether you apologize or not. You made
your comments in a public forum, right?

I did. And why would I apologize for an "attack" that didn't
occur?

Maybe you'd like to have 30 minutes at the Dayton Hamvention banquet
to
explain yourself, your view of how people are always misunderstanding
what you say, and why you are the victim.

(1) I am not a victim

(2) It seems there are only three people here who have a problem
with what I say, and that would be you, Lennie, and the person in the
e-mail. I'm not impressed that any "explanation" needs to occur.

And what would you care anyway? You said you had other plans much
too important to atttend Dayton.

You took offense...Too bad for you. You know as well as I
do
that
people can "take offense" at the most innocent of comments
all-the-while letting morbid profanity and bold threats roll
off
thier
backs. This is one of those moments.

Have a nice day.

Steve, K4YZ

Innocent comments - hi, hi! Robeson likes to make inuendo.

The "innuendo" was the respondants.

If you call him on it, he'll try to turn you into the deviant.

What's to "call", Brain?

He's always the victim.

Unlike you or Lennie who always have to be a victim, I REFUSE
to
be
a victim. That's probably what grates your cheese.

I am no victim of yours.

I didn't say you were. I said that my failure to BE victimized
irritates (grates your cheese) you.

You would have to matter for that to happen,and you just don't
matter.

Obviously not true, since responding to posts I make accounts for
over 85% of YOUR posts.

You simply have an emotional defect and you cannot help yourself.

What emotional defect, Brian?

Probably learned that tactic while rehearsing for his 100%
disability
hearing.

And there goes Brain with yet another lie that he'll never
substantiate.

Steve, K4YZ

So you're not disabled?

I didn't say I wasn't...However YOU claimed that I "rehearsed for
(my) 100% disability hearing". I have NEVER participated in ANY
hearing for ANY degree of disability. And I am certainly NOT "100%"
disabled.

Try again, Brian...

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

Hey Mike...It's not THAT far fetched...Burghardt in NY
has
had
that
young lady in the tight fitting sweater for years...Musta
beem
selling
SOMEthing!

But not radios, huh???

Only radios.

Obviously "something" that radio sellers sell is radios.

So why make such an obvious statement?

You and the e-mailer have the same problem, Brain. A
one-track,
race to evil conclusions minds.

Bad thing to have.

And so you try to make others the deviants. Isn't working.

I don't make anyone anything, Brian. I may hold a mirror up to
them, but anything they "are" is of thier own doing.

You misunderstand. A mirror is being held up for you.

The sleazy nudge-nudge insinuation in your "Musta beem
seeling
SOMEthing!" comment is one of the lowest forms of attack I've
ever
seen
on rrap.

Not really, but it is true to Steve's style.

What style?

True enough in the usual sense.

I'll expect to see a sincere unconditional apology on rrap by
the end of today, or I'll consider forwarding your trashy
comments
to
Michele and Jim.

Unlikely.

Absolutely unlikely. The respondant was asked both here and
in
private e-mail to show where an "attack" or an intent to attack
was
expressed.

The respondant failed to do so...That being because there
wasn't
one.

The "attack" was the respondant picking a fight with me for
no
other reason than it WAS me making the comments.

I see no attack. (S)he asked you to apologize for an off comment.
I
certainly have no problem with that person forwarding your comments
to
the young lady and her father whether you apologize or not. You
made
your comments in a public forum, right?

I did. And why would I apologize for an "attack" that didn't
occur?

Maybe you'd like to have 30 minutes at the Dayton Hamvention
banquet
to
explain yourself, your view of how people are always
misunderstanding
what you say, and why you are the victim.

(1) I am not a victim

"(1.a.) I REFUSE to be a victim." Hi, hi!

(2) It seems there are only three people here who have a problem
with what I say, and that would be you, Lennie, and the person in the
e-mail. I'm not impressed that any "explanation" needs to occur.

Hmmmm?

In another post you said that no one other than the mystery e-mailer
saw any impropriety in your comments. So which time were you lying?
Then or now?

Now you say that other than me, Len, and that mystery e-mailer...

But I don't see Len posting on this subject. So are you making yet
another lie?

And what would you care anyway? You said you had other plans
much
too important to atttend Dayton.

You sound like a man who needs to clear his conscience.

You took offense...Too bad for you. You know as well as
I
do
that
people can "take offense" at the most innocent of comments
all-the-while letting morbid profanity and bold threats roll
off
thier
backs. This is one of those moments.

Have a nice day.

Steve, K4YZ

Innocent comments - hi, hi! Robeson likes to make inuendo.

The "innuendo" was the respondants.

If you call him on it, he'll try to turn you into the deviant.

What's to "call", Brain?

He's always the victim.

Unlike you or Lennie who always have to be a victim, I REFUSE
to
be
a victim. That's probably what grates your cheese.

I am no victim of yours.

I didn't say you were. I said that my failure to BE victimized
irritates (grates your cheese) you.

Not at all. I have no intention of making you a victim, and I want no
responsibility for your actions. You handily do the victim routine all
by yourself (see mirror).

You would have to matter for that to happen,and you just don't
matter.

Obviously not true, since responding to posts I make accounts
for
over 85% of YOUR posts.

What's your track record?

You simply have an emotional defect and you cannot help yourself.

What emotional defect, Brian?

The one you exhibit daily on rrap.

bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

I don't make anyone anything, Brian. I may hold a mirror up
to
them, but anything they "are" is of thier own doing.

You misunderstand. A mirror is being held up for you.

You're in denial, Brian...No problem...WE see it...You still haev
a ways to go to get better.

(1) I am not a victim

"(1.a.) I REFUSE to be a victim." Hi, hi!

I imagine you hear a lot of laughter, Brian....and not all of it
from kids playing in the yard or the "laugh track" on your favorite
sitcom.

(2) It seems there are only three people here who have a
problem
with what I say, and that would be you, Lennie, and the person in
the
e-mail. I'm not impressed that any "explanation" needs to occur.

Hmmmm?

In another post you said that no one other than the mystery e-mailer
saw any impropriety in your comments. So which time were you lying?
Then or now?

There's no lying involved, Brian, other than your attempt to
redirect the specific comments being made.

Nice try. Very transparent.

Now you say that other than me, Len, and that mystery e-mailer...

But I don't see Len posting on this subject. So are you making yet
another lie?

Nope.

I am no victim of yours.

I didn't say you were. I said that my failure to BE victimized
irritates (grates your cheese) you.

Not at all. I have no intention of making you a victim, and I want
no
responsibility for your actions. You handily do the victim routine
all
by yourself (see mirror).

You still say you're holding up a mirror, yet all the foolish
assertions are still yours and still unanswered.

You try to redirect, and I refuse to allow you. No problem.

You would have to matter for that to happen,and you just don't
matter.

Obviously not true, since responding to posts I make accounts
for
over 85% of YOUR posts.

What's your track record?

Oh, I make no "warranty" about what and how I post. I quite
readily acknowledge that I am quite ready to stand toe-to-toe with
those who are obviously lying, misrepresenting Amateur Radio, or
inisist on acting foolishly in public.

Thankfully that sub-group of ner-do-wells is fairly narrow. You.
Lennie. Todd. Mark Morgan. The fairly few number of anonymous
cowards who haven't got the guts or strength of conviction to stand
behind thier already lame game.

You simply have an emotional defect and you cannot help yourself.

What emotional defect, Brian?

The one you exhibit daily on rrap.

You've not yet defined or identified any "emotional defect",
Brian. That comes from a lack of understanding of the words you're
using and from a lack of training/education in any healthcare related
discipline from which to draw the requisite knowledge from.

Try again.

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

I don't make anyone anything, Brian. I may hold a mirror up
to
them, but anything they "are" is of thier own doing.

You misunderstand. A mirror is being held up for you.

You're in denial, Brian...No problem...WE see it...

Who? You and you anonymous "attacker?"

(1) I am not a victim

"(1.a.) I REFUSE to be a victim." Hi, hi!

I imagine you hear a lot of laughter, Brian....

That's how hams laugh.

and not all of it
from kids playing in the yard or the "laugh track" on your favorite
sitcom.

I'm not big on sitcoms. You provide enough comic relief for me.

(2) It seems there are only three people here who have a
problem
with what I say, and that would be you, Lennie, and the person in
the
e-mail. I'm not impressed that any "explanation" needs to occur.

Hmmmm?

In another post you said that no one other than the mystery
e-mailer
saw any impropriety in your comments. So which time were you
lying?
Then or now?

There's no lying involved, Brian, other than your attempt to
redirect the specific comments being made.

Nice try. Very transparent.

No dodge, plymouth, nor chrysler. You lied.

Now you say that other than me, Len, and that mystery e-mailer...

But I don't see Len posting on this subject. So are you making yet
another lie?

Nope.

Show it.

I am no victim of yours.

I didn't say you were. I said that my failure to BE
victimized
irritates (grates your cheese) you.

Not at all. I have no intention of making you a victim, and I want
no
responsibility for your actions. You handily do the victim routine
all
by yourself (see mirror).

You still say you're holding up a mirror, yet all the foolish
assertions are still yours and still unanswered.

You try to redirect, and I refuse to allow you. No problem.

Big problem(s). You lied. You lied four times. You lied about your
inuendo, you lied when you characterized the anon e-mailer as and
"attacker," you lied about all of it not being a problem for anyone
except your anonymous "attacker," and then you lied about Len's
involvement in this thread.

I wonder how many lies you'll tell tomorrow?

You would have to matter for that to happen,and you just don't
matter.

Obviously not true, since responding to posts I make
accounts
for
over 85% of YOUR posts.

What's your track record?

Oh, I make no "warranty" about what and how I post.

You couldn't honor the warranty when it comes due.

I quite
readily acknowledge that I am quite ready to stand toe-to-toe with
those who are obviously lying, misrepresenting Amateur Radio, or
inisist on acting foolishly in public.

Toe to toe?

Welp, you got called on your inuendo, you got called on characterizing
the anon e-mailer as an "attacker," you got called on your lying, and
now the mirror is being help up for you to see yourself as the liar
that you are.

Thankfully that sub-group of ner-do-wells is fairly narrow.
You.
Lennie. Todd. Mark Morgan. The fairly few number of anonymous
cowards who haven't got the guts or strength of conviction to stand
behind thier already lame game.

"Thier" lame game?

Look, you're the one playing off-duty COP on rrap. You've shot off
your mouth once too often and someone is now trying to get back at you
with vile comments about your daughter. You shot off your mouth again
about a young woman in an amateur radio advertisement, and some
anonymous rrapper called you on it.

You stand alone. No one supports your latest gaffe.

You simply have an emotional defect and you cannot help
yourself.

What emotional defect, Brian?

The one you exhibit daily on rrap.

You've not yet defined or identified any "emotional defect",
Brian. That comes from a lack of understanding of the words you're
using and from a lack of training/education in any healthcare related
discipline from which to draw the requisite knowledge from.

Try again.

Nope. I don't have to be a psychiatrist to recognize a nutcase.

From: "bb" on Mon, Apr 4 2005 4:25 pm:

K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
bb wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

etc., etc., etc....

I don't make anyone anything, Brian. I may hold a mirror up to
them, but anything they "are" is of thier own doing.

You misunderstand. A mirror is being held up for you.

Heh. He can't see his own reflection... :-)

[...sort of a supernatural thing there...]


(1) I am not a victim

"(1.a.) I REFUSE to be a victim." Hi, hi!

Nursie is NEVER at fault...ALWAYS someone else's fault!

:-)

(2) It seems there are only three people here who have a
problem
with what I say, and that would be you, Lennie, and the person in
the
e-mail. I'm not impressed that any "explanation" needs to occur.

Hmmmm?

In another post you said that no one other than the mystery e-mailer
saw any impropriety in your comments. So which time were you lying?
Then or now?

Now you say that other than me, Len, and that mystery e-mailer...

But I don't see Len posting on this subject. So are you making yet
another lie?

Nursie NEVER lie! :-)

I haven't posted in this newsgroup for (about) 2 weeks.

Stevie da wonder ham is still angry, resentful, and
otherwise unglued about no one respecting his Dill
Instructor attitude for the past six years or so...:-)

"Temper fry?" Whoeee...temper be roasted to a crisp!


And what would you care anyway? You said you had other plans
much
too important to atttend Dayton.

You sound like a man who needs to clear his conscience.

First he has to HAVE a conscience... :-)


Unlike you or Lennie who always have to be a victim, I
REFUSE to be
a victim. That's probably what grates your cheese.

I am no victim of yours.

I didn't say you were. I said that my failure to BE victimized
irritates (grates your cheese) you.

Not at all. I have no intention of making you a victim, and I want no
responsibility for your actions. You handily do the victim routine
all
by yourself (see mirror).

The Avenging Angle is purely responsible for his own
actions...but, as noted, he can't see that in the
non-reflection (of himself) so, ergo, he is NOT
accountable for anything... :-)

It's ALWAYS "everyone else's fault!" :-)

Stebie has NO accreditation in accounting, by the way.
Without credentialed expertise in accounting, he
cannot account for it. :-)


You simply have an emotional defect and you cannot help yourself.

What emotional defect, Brian?

The one you exhibit daily on rrap.

1. He CAN'T see that...

2. Stebie is ALWAYS right, anyone disagreeing
with him is ALWAYS wrong...

3. This whole newsgroup seems to be all about
Hero Stebie Fighting The Forces of Evil... :-)

The original intent of this newsgroup was to discuss
amateur radio policy. It's turned into an sort of
professional wrestler arena of the old B&W TV days
where everything is about everyone doing battle with
everyone else on personalities... :-)

wrote:

From: "bb" on Mon, Apr 4 2005 4:25 pm:


K4YZ wrote:

bb wrote:

K4YZ wrote:

bb wrote:

K4YZ wrote:


etc., etc., etc....

I don't make anyone anything, Brian. I may hold a mirror up to
them, but anything they "are" is of thier own doing.

You misunderstand. A mirror is being held up for you.


Heh. He can't see his own reflection... :-)

[...sort of a supernatural thing there...]



(1) I am not a victim

"(1.a.) I REFUSE to be a victim." Hi, hi!


Nursie is NEVER at fault...ALWAYS someone else's fault!

:-)


(2) It seems there are only three people here who have a

problem

with what I say, and that would be you, Lennie, and the person in

the

e-mail. I'm not impressed that any "explanation" needs to occur.

Hmmmm?

In another post you said that no one other than the mystery e-mailer
saw any impropriety in your comments. So which time were you lying?
Then or now?

Now you say that other than me, Len, and that mystery e-mailer...

But I don't see Len posting on this subject. So are you making yet
another lie?


Nursie NEVER lie! :-)

I haven't posted in this newsgroup for (about) 2 weeks.

Stevie da wonder ham is still angry, resentful, and
otherwise unglued about no one respecting his Dill
Instructor attitude for the past six years or so...:-)

"Temper fry?" Whoeee...temper be roasted to a crisp!



And what would you care anyway? You said you had other plans

much

too important to atttend Dayton.

You sound like a man who needs to clear his conscience.


First he has to HAVE a conscience... :-)



Unlike you or Lennie who always have to be a victim, I

REFUSE to be

a victim. That's probably what grates your cheese.

I am no victim of yours.

I didn't say you were. I said that my failure to BE victimized
irritates (grates your cheese) you.

Not at all. I have no intention of making you a victim, and I want no
responsibility for your actions. You handily do the victim routine

all

by yourself (see mirror).


The Avenging Angle is purely responsible for his own
actions...but, as noted, he can't see that in the
non-reflection (of himself) so, ergo, he is NOT
accountable for anything... :-)

It's ALWAYS "everyone else's fault!" :-)

Stebie has NO accreditation in accounting, by the way.
Without credentialed expertise in accounting, he
cannot account for it. :-)



You simply have an emotional defect and you cannot help yourself.

What emotional defect, Brian?

The one you exhibit daily on rrap.


1. He CAN'T see that...

2. Stebie is ALWAYS right, anyone disagreeing
with him is ALWAYS wrong...

3. This whole newsgroup seems to be all about
Hero Stebie Fighting The Forces of Evil... :-)

The original intent of this newsgroup was to discuss
amateur radio policy. It's turned into an sort of
professional wrestler arena of the old B&W TV days
where everything is about everyone doing battle with
everyone else on personalities... :-)




Len, why do you talk like a two year old?