On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Goo lied:

>On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:12:53 -0100, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, an inept Goober failed completely to defend his beliefs:
>>
>>>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:25:26 -0100, dh@. wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008, Goo tried to defend the misnomer:
>>>>
>>>>>Goo - ****wit David Harrison, fat pig-****er and moronic cracker - lied
>>>>>and presented no challenge:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008, Goo tried to defend the misnomer:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Goo - ****wit David Harrison, fat pig-****er and moronic cracker - lied and presented no challenge:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 02 Jul 2008, Goo tried to defend the misnomer:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> preventing "future farm animals" (ugh) from existing does not
>>>>>>>>> make any animals worse off.
>>>>>>>> So what Goo?
>>>>>>> So, you don't have any point left, Goo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The point is that "ar" is a gross misnomer Goo.
>>>>>
>>>>>No
>>>>
>>>> Yes it is Goo. But since you want to argue that it's not
>>>>Goober, try explaining which rights you think it would
>>>>provide for which animals. Go:
>>>
>>>No
>>
>> LOL!!! You always fail Goo. Every one of you ALWAYS
>>fails to be able to explain which rights for which animals
>>Goober, proving that "ar" is a gross misnomer...proving it
>>time after time after time after time after time after time...
>>..............................after time after time............................
>>consistently!
>
>Win. I won

You loose every time you fail completely to explain
which rights for which animals Goo, and you fail
completely each time you are challenged to answer
the question. For example: In this particular example
which you are lying about winning, you in fact lost
because you failed completely to make any attempt
to explain. I will now cause you to loose again Goo,
by failing again to answer the question:

Which rights for which animals?