Hear ' bout them 200 WMD sitese in Iraq ?

George Bush is gonna invade ..

Yessiree Bob ! !

wrote:

Hear ' bout them 200 WMD sitese in Iraq ?

George Bush is gonna invade ..

Yessiree Bob ! !

When did you get out of therapy? I'm guessing you went there after Kerry lost.

You did disappear for quite a while. Was that the reason?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

- Was in Iraq, Lookin fer them WMD's..

On 2005-02-19, Honus wrote:

"Al Arduengo" wrote in message
news

Replys should stay within the thread from which they originated.

You must be new to Usenet. When a thread goes off on such a tangent that it
has nothing to do with the original post, the polite thing to do is rename
the thread...preferably with a Was: in front of the old name. That way
people who want to follow the original, on-topic discussion can do so
without wading through all of the other, unrelated crap. Let's say we're
discussing images, and cuhulin chimes in that his dog Blueberry
www.cattledog.com just farted in his open mouth. That leads off to a thread
of discussion that has nothing to do with images, like why is his open mouth
so close to Blueberry's ass in the first place? Anyone who wants to follow
the images conversation has to wade through the farting cattledog replies.
Not good.

So then someone renames the thread "Cuhulin sucks dog farts Was: images".

That's good. See, when the replies aren't to the original thread, they don't
belong in the thread they originated in.



Actually I am not new to usenet. And I made the invalid assumption that those
reading would know to only create a new thread when the actual subject of the
discussion changed. Most of the violaters here start a new thread everytime
they reply to a post. *That* is what I am complaining about.

Thanks.

--
~/.signature

Now I Know! you are a mental case!
cuhulin

wrote:

- Was in Iraq, Lookin fer them WMD's..

Uh huh... so when did you get out of therapy?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

In article ,
dxAce wrote:

wrote:

- Was in Iraq, Lookin fer them WMD's..

Uh huh... so when did you get out of therapy?

It looks to me that the therapy didn't take.

Try electro-shock next time.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Al Arduengo" wrote in message
news
Replys should stay within the thread from which they originated.

Thanks all.
--
~/.signature


Thank you Al,
I'm so glad you took the time to share this with me.

TIA, Cya

Burr

I guess I am one of the bad guys, I'm sorry that I started a new tread but I
"just can't help myself".

Any help you could give me as to where I may be able to get help would
be appreciated

Sincerely

Burr



"Al Arduengo" wrote in message
...
On 2005-02-19, Honus wrote:

"Al Arduengo" wrote in message
news

Replys should stay within the thread from which they originated.

You must be new to Usenet. When a thread goes off on such a tangent that
it
has nothing to do with the original post, the polite thing to do is
rename
the thread...preferably with a Was: in front of the old name. That way
people who want to follow the original, on-topic discussion can do so
without wading through all of the other, unrelated crap. Let's say we're
discussing images, and cuhulin chimes in that his dog Blueberry
www.cattledog.com just farted in his open mouth. That leads off to a
thread
of discussion that has nothing to do with images, like why is his open
mouth
so close to Blueberry's ass in the first place? Anyone who wants to
follow
the images conversation has to wade through the farting cattledog
replies.
Not good.

So then someone renames the thread "Cuhulin sucks dog farts Was: images".

That's good. See, when the replies aren't to the original thread, they
don't
belong in the thread they originated in.



Actually I am not new to usenet. And I made the invalid assumption that
those
reading would know to only create a new thread when the actual subject of
the
discussion changed. Most of the violaters here start a new thread
everytime
they reply to a post. *That* is what I am complaining about.

Thanks.

--
~/.signature

wrote in message
...

I am NOT a terrorist.

No one said that you were. Well, Bush might have implied it at some point.

I root for the Republic of Ireland and Scotland.

My wife's a Scot. BFD.

If you don't like my opinion,YOU go to HELL!!!

There is no Hell, unless it's living next door to you. And if disliking
someone's opinions gets them on the fast track to Hell, well then...we're
going to be traveling companions, you and I.

YOU canadian TURD!!!!!!

I'm not a Canadian, dip****. And I'm more of an American than you could ever
hope to be.


GO IRA,GO!

The IRA are terrorists. They've killed hundreds of innocent civilians,
including children. They've been known to associate and align themselves
with communists, South American drug dealers and Islamic terrorists. And
again we see you rooting for them. Why don't you do a little research on the
net about these people, and then get back to us. I'd sure like to hear if
about it if your position changes.

Oh, and you never got back to me about whether or not the word homophobe
applies to you. Did you look it up? Did you understand the definition? Do I
get that apology from you?