Pierian Spring wrote:
In whatever guise he appears, the incurable CBer Not-Ham, a
self confessed criminal pirate, is as childish and as foul as
ever.....

Insofar as he is a criminal, then we pay him no further heed.

guv wrote:
"Pierian Spring" wrote in message
oups.com...

Snip ****

**** off, Evans.

Is that your 'software' that you wrote, Evans, to determine that the post
you quoted was mine?
As ever, you're completely wrong. Kinda sums up your dismal life, doesn't
it?
Are you drunk yet? Getting in the mood for some baaadroom antics with
Elisabeth?
I've never been arrested. How many times is it for you? Do you have a
favourite cell at the Chippenham nick?

Total loser, Evans.
--
huLLy
Mobile phone 07976 123278
ICQ 136-987-925

zYYPK wrote:
wrote:

NWTAP, but his postings are more symptomatic of bipolar disorder than
of senile dementure.

and i'm sure you are qualified to make such a suggestion ???

if you are fine... if you are not then why did you ?

You're right, of course. It was unprofessional to attempt a remote
diagnosis. Besides, a face-to-face consultation would be fascinating -
there must be enough material there for an entire conference.

73
Mike G4KFK

wrote:
zYYPK wrote:
wrote:

NWTAP, but his postings are more symptomatic of bipolar disorder than
of senile dementure.

and i'm sure you are qualified to make such a suggestion ???

if you are fine... if you are not then why did you ?

You're right, of course. It was unprofessional to attempt a remote
diagnosis. Besides, a face-to-face consultation would be fascinating -
there must be enough material there for an entire conference.

fascinating? are you sure the answer isn't sickiening? or something
along those lines


73
Mike G4KFK

If you wish to be for ever perceived to be a Childish Broadcaster
(CBer)
then carry on, as you do below, with your Childish Broadcasting (CB).

Not only is it unprofessional but it is also a criminal act for
a ship's radio "officer" to attempt to pass himself off as a
medical professional.

Grow up, Mike Gathergood!

Stupid boy.

wrote:

You're right, of course. It was unprofessional to attempt a remote
diagnosis. Besides, a face-to-face consultation would be fascinating -
there must be enough material there for an entire conference.

"guv" wrote:

xxxx xxx, xxxxx.


the foul mouthed cb'er ....

"huLLy" wrote:

Are you drunk yet? Getting in the mood for some baaadroom antics with
xxxxxxxxx?

there you go again...
giving a green light to all and sundry to mention your own wife BY NAME !!

zYYPK wrote:
"huLLy" wrote:

Are you drunk yet? Getting in the mood for some baaadroom antics with
xxxxxxxxx?

there you go again...
giving a green light to all and sundry to mention your own wife BY
NAME !!

No, it was already in the public domain, mention by Gareth himself many a
time. So there's not really a problem, is there. If he hadn't mentioned his
wife's name, neither would I.
--
huLLy
Mobile phone 07976 123278
ICQ 136-987-925

"huLLy" wrote:

there you go again...
giving a green light to all and sundry to mention your own wife BY
NAME !!

No, it was already in the public domain, mention by Gareth himself many a


wrong !

i'm sure another on here will confirm.

In article .com,
says...

Pierian Spring

Oh, look... Airy-head's got a new morph...

yawn!

*PLONK!*


--
Dr. Anton T. Squeegee, Director, Dutch Surrealist Plumbing Institute.
(Known to some as Bruce Lane, ARS KC7GR,
kyrrin (a/t) bluefeathertech[d=o=t]calm -- www.bluefeathertech.com
"If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped
with surreal ports?"

Not-Ham seems desperate to justify his infantile and gratuious
offensive outbursts. There is no justification for such anti-social,
obsessive, and maladjusted behaviour as he demonstrates.

He is a deranged looney BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF A DOUBT.

He is also very immature if he will not take personal responsibilty
for his own actions.

I have _NEVER_ mentioned my wife's name in this NG, nor that of
my children, nor that of my grandchildren.

Those who seek to do so and cause harassment and distress thereby
are sick in the mind.

zYYPK wrote:
"huLLy" wrote:

there you go again...
giving a green light to all and sundry to mention your own wife BY
NAME !!

No, it was already in the public domain, mention by Gareth himself many a


wrong !

i'm sure another on here will confirm.