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.