"Steve Carroll" <trollkiller@TK.com> wrote in message
news:trollkiller-C5DF71.17453007092008@newsgroups.comcast.net
> In article <C4E970FA.D5067%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> "Mother Farquhar" <nospam.spam.nospam@gmail.com> stated in post
>> 3U62gNbsP78bLmGuCvDIwmA_d9bbEWn9@alt...witzers.com.gu
>> ernsey on 9/7/08 11:47 AM:
>>
>>>>> If I wrote a letter and posted it in the mail using an envelope,
>>>>> your address and a stamp then I would have posted a letter.
>>>>> However, I could have
>>>>> also just sent a blank piece of paper, some used arsewipe or a
>>>>> book token.
>>>>> The act of sending whatever is still referred to as posting a
>>>>> letter, regardless. If the envelope was empty and it got posted,
>>>>> it's no different.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you receive an email with no content then you've still
>>>>> received the email, no?
>>>>>
>>>> While you can have a post that is just a header most posts are not
>>>> just headers.
>>>>
>>>> Wasn't the initial question, though, if the header was a part of
>>>> the post? I
>>>> did not really follow the debate...
>>>>
>>> All I noticed was something about a header by some fuckwit whining
>>> about poor
>>> grammar, the issue is not grammar at all, it's notional. If I make
>>> a post it's
>>> a post. All posts have headers, most have some content, some may
>>> have empty subject lines or bodies but a post is a post
>>> nonetheless. Tim Murray may be some sort of donkeys' scrotum licker
>>> for all I know or care.
>>
>> I agree with your above comments about posts... and, of course,
>> disagree with Steve Carroll's bogus accusations that his posts are
>> my responsibility - especially when, apparently, it has now been
>> proved that at least some of the posts he denies having made were
>> made with header info that proves he did make them.
>
> As I have only admitted to having written the posts that used the
> same header info as this post here... this just isn't possible. But
> that's your MO all the way... believing things that are just not
> possible (see quoted material below).
>
>
>> Frankly Steve Carroll is in serious, serious need of psychological
>> help - over a disagreement about Bush from several *years* ago he
>> has been freaking out, following me, and trolling me ever since. So
>> he failed to be able to refute an argument about his then-hero
>> George W. Bush. Oh well. Is it not time he move on?
>
> You really need to get your money back on your "psych degree", Snit
>
> Here is the gist of your Bush "argument"...
>
> --
> Me:
> "Your argument asserted that a sitting President is a war criminal.
> You
> agreed (a few paragraphs above) that the evidence you used to support
> this was 'based on legalities' (based on the breaking, or not, of a
> law)".
>
> Snit:
> "Yes. Very good".
>
> Me:
> "You have just admitted that your evidence does not prove this
> assertion".
>
> Snit:
> "Right. It does not offer proof. The definition of proof is: "a
> formal series of statements showing that if one thing is true
> something else necessarily follows from it". While the evidence in
> my argument points to
> the conclusion and strongly supports it, it is not, technically, in a
> logical sense, proof".
>
> Me:
> "You have just completed your challenge to refute your own argument".
>
> Snit (now babbling incoherently, as he usually does when whupped):
> "Since early on I have been asking for refutations. I do not believe
> I have ever stated that none can possibly exist, only that none have
> been provided. If I felt none could exist, why would I be seeking one?
>
> My argument strongly supports the conclusion I reach, but I am open to
> counter evidence. Acknowledging that there is the possibility that a
> refutation may exist does not prove its existence. I am not sure
> what you were thinking when you asserted such".
> BBFBA53B.34A2D%snit-nospam@cableone.net>
>
> --
>
> What more needs to be said? LOL!

Please stop forging my posts as you beg for my attention, Snit. Thanks!


--
"Apple is pushing how green this is - but it [Macbook Air] is
clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much
just throw it away". - Snit