nobodys old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
Mark,

cutting

I said: Geez, Mark, and I just thought we were getting to get
to be
buddies. Guess the engagement's off, huh?

Stevie making a pass at me

Nope.

yep you are in plain langauge

Nope. More of your delusions of grandeur, Markie.

nope more of you your sexual harassment

What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!

Mark said: That is your best shot. I notice that you don't
disagree


To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!


a nice clear death threat

Nope.

sure is

Nope.

Not then...Not today...

was then and remains today

Nope and nope.

But your continuous ranting about it certainly substantiates my
claims that you are paranoid.

no way that is anything but a death threat

It's a lot of things...A death threat isn't one of them.

It can only be a death threat

Nope.

It has nothing to do with hamradio

The what were YOU doing making your own "best shot" comments?

shots do not always involve gun or killing

No, they don't.

But afterall, Markie, YOU have stated it's not what the "spaeker"
intended, but what YOU perceived...

A "shot" in the context you made YOUR comment, especially
considering my military service, either meant a firearm or a punch...In
either case, a violent act.

nothing to with the topic "Cw it more than just a mode"

What were you doing making slanderous comments?

I was not making one

Here we are again, Markie. YOU have stated it's not what the
"spaeker" intended, but what (YOU) perceived...

So...does that concept NOT apply to YOU...?!?!

can't have been I could have been making libelous one, but I was doing
that either

Sure you were...

The tone, content and delivery of your comments were ALL meant to
incite and inflame. No more...no less...

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
nobodys old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
Mark,

cutting

I said: Geez, Mark, and I just thought we were getting to get
to be
buddies. Guess the engagement's off, huh?

Stevie making a pass at me

Nope.

yep you are in plain langauge

Nope. More of your delusions of grandeur, Markie.

nope more of you your sexual harassment

What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!

yours


Mark said: That is your best shot. I notice that you don't
disagree


To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!


a nice clear death threat

Nope.

sure is

Nope.

Not then...Not today...

was then and remains today

Nope and nope.

sure a death

and no one invites a death threat

just like no one invites rape or any other crime

Wondering if Markie will answer this question:

"Hey Markie...Do The "Rules" Not Apply To You Too...?!?!"

nobodys_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!

yours

I repeat the question since you didn't answer it...

What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!

Mark said: That is your best shot. I notice that you don't
disagree


To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!


a nice clear death threat

Nope.

sure is

Nope.

Not then...Not today...

was then and remains today

Nope and nope.

sure a death

"sure a death"...?!?!

That wasn't English.

Try again.

and no one invites a death threat

For once something we can agree on.

just like no one invites rape or any other crime

Who invited what crime?

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
Wondering if Markie will answer this question:

"Hey Markie...Do The "Rules" Not Apply To You Too...?!?!"

no question there


nobodys_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!

yours

I repeat the question since you didn't answer it...

I did you just did notlike the answer

What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!

Mark said: That is your best shot. I notice that you don't
disagree


To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!


a nice clear death threat

Nope.

sure is

Nope.

Not then...Not today...

was then and remains today

Nope and nope.

sure a death

"sure a death"...?!?!

That wasn't English.

Try again.

and no one invites a death threat

For once something we can agree on.

then you were lying in saying I invited it



just like no one invites rape or any other crime

Who invited what crime?
any crime

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
Wondering if Markie will answer this question:

"Hey Markie...Do The "Rules" Not Apply To You Too...?!?!"



no question there


nobodys_old_friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:


What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!


yours


I repeat the question since you didn't answer it...



I did you just did notlike the answer



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

What "sexual harrassment"...?!?!


Mark said: That is your best shot. I notice that you don't
disagree


To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!


a nice clear death threat


Nope.


sure is


Nope.


Not then...Not today...


was then and remains today


Nope and nope.


sure a death


"sure a death"...?!?!


That wasn't English.


Try again.


and no one invites a death threat


For once something we can agree on.



then you were lying in saying I invited it



- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

just like no one invites rape or any other crime


Who invited what crime?
any crime


Steve, K4YZ

wrote:
an old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
Mark,

cutting

I said: Geez, Mark, and I just thought we were getting to get
to be
buddies. Guess the engagement's off, huh?

Stevie making a pass at me



Mark said: That is your best shot. I notice that you don't
disagree


To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!


a nice clear death threat


no way that is anything but a death threat

no tlak by stevie of debate or tlaking at nothing but going on about
shooting and killing

Steve loves charades. His favorite is the "I'm almost going to make a
threat, but I am going to make you think I made a threat" charade.

---------------------
Brian said: "There never was an insinuation, Mr. Robeson. It was a
case of your misunderstanding and a dose of your wishful thinking."

Then Steve said: "I don't think that your previously archived comments
might be read that way. For an offense to have occured, it onl;y
requires that it be perceived as such."
--------------------

Steve only has to perceive a threat, but he says the rest of us have to
have the courts decide.

wrote:
wrote:
an old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
Mark,

cut
no tlak by stevie of debate or tlaking at nothing but going on about
shooting and killing

Steve loves charades. His favorite is the "I'm almost going to make a
threat, but I am going to make you think I made a threat" charade.

---------------------
Brian said: "There never was an insinuation, Mr. Robeson. It was a
case of your misunderstanding and a dose of your wishful thinking."

Then Steve said: "I don't think that your previously archived comments
might be read that way. For an offense to have occured, it onl;y
requires that it be perceived as such."
--------------------

Steve only has to perceive a threat, but he says the rest of us have to
have the courts decide.

In all fairness I beleive Stevie allows this power also the MMM

an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
an old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
Mark,

cut
no tlak by stevie of debate or tlaking at nothing but going on about
shooting and killing

Steve loves charades. His favorite is the "I'm almost going to make a
threat, but I am going to make you think I made a threat" charade.

---------------------
Brian said: "There never was an insinuation, Mr. Robeson. It was a
case of your misunderstanding and a dose of your wishful thinking."

Then Steve said: "I don't think that your previously archived comments
might be read that way. For an offense to have occured, it onl;y
requires that it be perceived as such."
--------------------

Steve only has to perceive a threat, but he says the rest of us have to
have the courts decide.

In all fairness I beleive Stevie allows this power also the MMM

Ah, those Morsemen. The Mighty Macho Morsemen! As long as they
realize that the Dud (as in UXO) has bestowed such privelege upon them.

an old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

quoting you stevie
To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!

Unquote

the last sentence is particularly ilumanting

wrote:
wrote:
cut


---------------------
Brian said: "There never was an insinuation, Mr. Robeson. It was a
case of your misunderstanding and a dose of your wishful thinking."

Then Steve said: "I don't think that your previously archived comments
might be read that way. For an offense to have occured, it onl;y
requires that it be perceived as such."
--------------------

Steve only has to perceive a threat, but he says the rest of us have to
have the courts decide.

and therefore according to stevie as the one who received the threat I
decide if it was threatening

an Old friend wrote:
an old friend wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

quoting you stevie
To which I will reply: ( 1. ) I wasn't there to verify the
participants at
the act of conception. If calling me a ******* makes you feel better,
then have
at it ( 2 ) I am a 9 time USMC Rifle Expert Mark. If I want
something
shot, even in Illinois, I will hit the target. One shot, one kill. I
don't
waste the govenments ammunition hitting targets that are not of
consequence.
YOU are not of ANY consequence that I am aware of, but situations ARE
subject
to change!

Unquote

the last sentence is particularly ilumanting

wrote:
wrote:
cut


---------------------
Brian said: "There never was an insinuation, Mr. Robeson. It was a
case of your misunderstanding and a dose of your wishful thinking."

Then Steve said: "I don't think that your previously archived comments
might be read that way. For an offense to have occured, it onl;y
requires that it be perceived as such."
--------------------

Steve only has to perceive a threat, but he says the rest of us have to
have the courts decide.

and therefore according to stevie as the one who received the threat I
decide if it was threatening

It would appear that way.

But there's always a double-standard at work in this newsgripe, so the
usual rules of logic don't always work.