Rat & Swan wrote:

For the record, this is a lie. My son was not taken from me
by anyone or any agency, public or private. Jonnie knows this.

Repeating a lie does not make it so, Jonnie. It merely makes it
obvious you are completely without scruples.

Rat

"usual suspect" wrote

Dutch wrote:
Jonathan Ball, thinking he's fooling everyone by
alternating between half a dozen different posters
wrote

Bullshit, unlike you, he has never tried to pretend that his aliases are
anyone else.

Jon's also never responded to his own posts, much less traded e-mail
addresses in them (lmao):

http://tinyurl.com/u7xx

Yes, that was particularly good lowlight in the career of a particularly
good lowlife.

Rat & Swan wrote:




Rat & Swan wrote:


For the record, this is a lie. My son was not taken from me
by anyone or any agency, public or private. Jonnie knows this.

Your son was taken from you, by your father.

As I said, this is a lie. He was not.

He was. Your whole life has been one massive self
indulgence. Having the kid in the first place was a
self indulgence, and further self indulgence - focusing
on your sex life rather than nurturing and raising your
son - led to a conclusion that he needed to be raised
elsewhere. You were only too happy to be rid of him;
further evidence of your wrecked mind.

You snipped without noting that he is estranged from you.

Repeating a lie

It isn't a lie. Your son was taken from you, and is
now estranged from you except for minimal e-mail contact.

"Derek" wrote
[..]
If I hire a killer have I done anything unethical? I haven't killed
anyone.

If you hire a killer, then you are responsible for
the deaths you hire him to cause.

That's also true if you hire that killer to rob a convenience store.

You know the farmer is a killer, yet you hire him to rob that convenience
store.

[..]

and I don't demand that animals be killed

Then you aren't responsible for any deaths accrued
by those who farm "your" land.

But I know they use 'cides and I hire them anyway.

[..]

I just want wheat to grow on my land and I don't
want it to cost 10x as much as the wheat is worth.
The decision to use herbicides is made by the
government, it's a crime to not use them.

No. That's a lie. Farmers are not legally forced to use
cides of any kind. The decision to use them is always
down to the individual who farms the land.

That's not true, in Saskatchewan it's mandatory for all farmers to use
herbicides (e.g. Roundup) to control wild oats. It can't be done any other
way. If you want bread to eat you automatically support the use of Roundup.

Derek wrote:

"Dutch" wrote in message ...

"Derek" wrote

Which "vegans" here on usenet have done *anything*
concrete to stop killing them? None.


Which vegans here on Usenet have done *anything*
concrete to start killing them? None.


There's the long and the short of it.

The long and short of it is that ALL "vegans", on and
off usenet, are complicit in the collateral deaths of
animals. This is not legitimately in dispute.

Provide proof, Jonnie. I know you are lying, so do all the regular
posters who have seen you try this shoddy lie before.

Rat

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message ink.net...
Derek wrote:

Which "vegans" here on usenet have done *anything*
concrete to stop killing them? None.

Which vegans here on Usenet have done *anything*
concrete to start killing them? None.
There's the long and the short of it.

The long and short of it is that ALL "vegans", on and
off usenet, are complicit in the collateral deaths of
animals.

Claiming vegans to be complicit or causal to the
collateral deaths caused by farmers invokes the
fallacy;

Non causa pro causa

1.. Type-Level: A causal law has the form:

Events of type C cause events of type E.
Here, we are not talking about a causal relation
holding between two particular events, but the
general causal relation holding between instances
of two types of event. For example, when we
say that smoking cigarettes causes lung cancer,
we are not talking about an individual act of
smoking causing a particular case of lung cancer.
Rather, we mean that smoking is a type of event
which causes another type of event, namely,
cancer.

Mistakes about type-level causation are the
result of confusing correlation with causation.
Two types of event may occur simultaneously,
or one type always following the other type,
without there being a causal relation between
them. One common source of non-causal
correlations between two event-types is when
both are effects of a third type of event.
http://gncurtis.home.texas.net/index.html

Dreck Nash, ****witted shitbag ordinaire, wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message ink.net...

Derek wrote:

Which "vegans" here on usenet have done *anything*
concrete to stop killing them? None.

Which vegans here on Usenet have done *anything*
concrete to start killing them? None.
There's the long and the short of it.

The long and short of it is that ALL "vegans", on and
off usenet, are complicit in the collateral deaths of
animals.


Claiming vegans to be complicit or causal to the
collateral deaths caused by farmers invokes the
fallacy;

Non causa pro causa

**** off, Dreck. This is how we know it's you: you
run your ****ing ignorant mouth when you're
bone-ignorant, and have misidentified a fallacy.

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...
Dreck Nash, ****witted shitbag ordinaire, wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message ink.net...

Derek wrote:

Which "vegans" here on usenet have done *anything*
concrete to stop killing them? None.

Which vegans here on Usenet have done *anything*
concrete to start killing them? None.
There's the long and the short of it.

The long and short of it is that ALL "vegans", on and
off usenet, are complicit in the collateral deaths of
animals.


Claiming vegans to be complicit or causal to the
collateral deaths caused by farmers invokes the
fallacy;

Non causa pro causa

**** off, Dreck.

Unsupported speculation.

Dreck Nash, ****witted shitbag ordinaire, wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

Dreck Nash, ****witted shitbag ordinaire, wrote:


"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message ink.net...


Derek wrote:


Which "vegans" here on usenet have done *anything*
concrete to stop killing them? None.

Which vegans here on Usenet have done *anything*
concrete to start killing them? None.
There's the long and the short of it.

The long and short of it is that ALL "vegans", on and
off usenet, are complicit in the collateral deaths of
animals.


Claiming vegans to be complicit or causal to the
collateral deaths caused by farmers invokes the
fallacy;

Non causa pro causa

**** off, Dreck.


Unsupported speculation.

**** off, Dreck, you miserable cocksucker.

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

**** off, Dreck, you miserable cocksucker.

I was, once. I no longer believe in an afterlife.
Jonathan Ball 2002-04-20

http://members.global2000.net/~periph/

Ipse dixit wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

**** off, Dreck, you miserable cocksucker.


I

**** off, Dreck. You're not fooling anyone. The mere
choice of quote confirms it's you.

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...
Ipse dixit wrote:
"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

**** off, Dreck. You're not fooling anyone. The mere
choice of quote confirms it's you.

These constant evasions by accusing everyone of being Derek are
wearing a bit thin, Bill / Jonathan Ball / Everett / Usual Suspect /
Murry Cooper / Elvera / Silvia, and it's obvious you use this game
plan as a means to bail out of uncomfortable discussions and for the
purposes of launching personal attacks against people you disagree
with instead of dealing with them in the usual honest way. Derek has
written to me confirming I am correct about you on this point, and a
perfect example of this was demonstrated only a short while ago in your
recent encounter with a highly experienced member in alt.philosophy.
It backfired on you, as it was surely bound to, because that member's
posts are archived while mine are not, leaving you unable to explain the
many thousands of posts made by "Immortalist" who at the same time,
according to you, was also making an equally large number of posts in
alt.food.vegan as Derek over several years

I've been on Usenet for years now and regularly change my nym
for reasons I have no wish to discuss with the likes of you, and if
Derek wishes to take my advice he will use my news server, reader
and nym to keep you and your many characters occupied. I may or
may not take up a new nym, and that's the beauty and advantage in
being anonymous on Usenet: it's impersonal, and Derek is more than
welcome to adopt my identity to experience this for himself.

Ipse dixit wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

Ipse dixit wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

**** off, Dreck. You're not fooling anyone. The mere
choice of quote confirms it's you.


These constant

**** off, Dreck. It's you, and everyone knows it.

**** off and die, asshole.

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...
Ipse dixit wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

Ipse dixit wrote:

"Jonathan Ball" wrote in message nk.net...

**** off, Dreck. You're not fooling anyone. The mere
choice of quote confirms it's you.


These constant

**** off, Dreck. It's you, and everyone knows it.

**** off and die, asshole.

These constant evasions by accusing everyone of being Derek are
wearing a bit thin, Bill / Jonathan Ball / Everett / Usual Suspect /
Murry Cooper / Elvera / Silvia, and it's obvious you use this game
plan as a means to bail out of uncomfortable discussions and for the
purposes of launching personal attacks against people you disagree
with instead of dealing with them in the usual honest way. Derek has
written to me confirming I am correct about you on this point, and a
perfect example of this was demonstrated only a short while ago in your
recent encounter with a highly experienced member in alt.philosophy.
It backfired on you, as it was surely bound to, because that member's
posts are archived while mine are not, leaving you unable to explain the
many thousands of posts made by "Immortalist" who at the same time,
according to you, was also making an equally large number of posts in
alt.food.vegan as Derek over several years

I've been on Usenet for years now and regularly change my nym
for reasons I have no wish to discuss with the likes of you, and if
Derek wishes to take my advice he will use my news server, reader
and nym to keep you and your many characters occupied. I may or
may not take up a new nym, and that's the beauty and advantage in
being anonymous on Usenet: it's impersonal, and Derek is more than
welcome to adopt my identity to experience this for himself.