View Single Post
  #37 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 27-07-2006, 12:31 PM posted to,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,talk.politics.animals
William[_2_] William[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 42
Default Where's everybody gone?

Hello Usual Suspect. I know who you are now.

"Leif Erikson" wrote in message
William wrote:

"Leif Erikson" wrote in message

William wrote:

"Leif Erikson" wrote in message

William wrote:

"Leif Erikson" wrote in message

William wrote:

I wasn't talking about Lesley. I was talking about Pearl,

That's lesley, you dummy. "pearl" is her ****witted pseudonym.

Sorry. I didn't know that.

She is anything but a pearl; more like a

jagged piece of broken glass from a cheap bottle of beer.


and having an open mind about her beliefs.

You don't really mean to have an open mind about them, dumb-ass. What you
mean is to be predisposed to accept them because they're new-age kooky.

Apart from a few items on that list I'm open-minded the rest and
believe some of them.

Exactly. You are predisposed to accepting at face value any new-age kooky
bullshit that appears to go against common sense, and that plays to your
perverse need to be "different". You misinterpret this as "open-mindedness".
It isn't

I agree - it isn't "open-mindedness." Being open-minded is all about being
receptive of others' ideas and beliefs.

No, that is *NOT* what being open-minded is

Yes it is.

[snip crap]

That was the definition of open-mindedness you cut away, and
it fits perfectly with mine. Is that why you cut it? ;-)

Having or showing receptiveness to new and different ideas or the opinions of others.

"Being open-minded is all about being receptive of others' ideas and beliefs."

No, it isn't.

Yes it is.

"Being open-minded is all about being receptive of others' ideas and beliefs."

Wrong. That dictionary definition is simply bullshit.

It's the correct definition, and it's the definition I used.

Being *receptive* is not being open minded, you ****ing idiot; it's being

If born liars exist

lesley is one.

No. Ispe Dixit knows her well and told me ages ago that she's a reliable
expert on nutrition and alternative animal-friendly treatments.

Derek was incorrect about that

Incorrect about what? I'm telling you what Ipse Dixit told me. He wrote me an email.

"zero point field" (GUFFAW!)

I've been vegan for over two years now and doing great by it.

"inner earth beings"
"hollow earth"
that goofy patent for a MANUFACTURED globe
helium-inflated number(s) for feed:beef
rain forest destruction
Brazil's exports (based on *Argentina's* trade)
Stolen French flying saucer
Foot massage (as cure-all)
Alien abduction


I very much doubt that.

I thought you were open minded?

You can doubt things while being open-minded about them.

You're not being honestly open-minded about it.

Yes I am,

No, you aren't.

Her endorsement of it was correctly inferred from her failure to state her
opposition to it following her statement of support for someone (Karen Winter) who
openly endorses it. lesley was asked repeatedly if she wanted to distance herself
from Karen on at least that one issue, and she refused to do so. That is implicit
support for it.

No. Read Pearl's post. "To repeat- I think it is a perversion, and if it is contrary
to an animals'
instinct and requires conditioning or abuse, I _strongly_ condemn it." What more do
you want?
She strongly condemns it and thinks it's a perversion. That's one item I've taken off
that list,
Usual Suspect. I wonder how many others are there that shouldn't be.

Polar fountains
Sun gazing
AIDS and ebola conspiracy theory
Crop circles
sexually aroused by violent ex-convicts

Yeah right.

She was married to a ****ing British skinhead, you idiot! The guy was an
ex-convict. He was a skinhead when she hooked up with him. That's *why* she
got together with him: she was aroused by it.

You can't possibly know all that. Soryy, but I don't believe you.

I do know all of it.

Then you should be quiet and stop all your nonsense.


Why did you cut, you chickenshit closed-minded ****wit?


She went out of town, and he got into her computer and started posting, right here
in this newsgroup - a lot of wild, violence-tinged stuff. He found and began
posting in some skinhead-oriented groups as well. Here is his post: He was using her computer and her pseudonym at that
time, "lilweed".


Leave it in shitbag. Leave it in as a testament to your closed-mindedness.

I've no comment to make on her personal life because 1, I don't
know all the facts. 2, I don't want to know them. 3, you sure as hell
don't know them. 4, It's none of our business. 5, Her personal life
has no bearing on her expertise in vegan nutrition and alternative

As for all the rest, they're all weird beliefs that fly in the face of logic and
common sense and science, and that's *why* you believe in them.

I see the emphasis you put on 'why', and I disagree with those
reasons. I'm not a vegan just because it flies in the face of
common sense.

You're a "vegan" (quotes of derision) because it feeds your need to be

No, it's a consequence of the principles I hold regarding the treatment
of animals.

No, it's based on your wish to try to be distinctive, to be "different".

You're welcome to believe whatever you want, but always remember
that you're not in a position to tell me what I believe.

You're an unaccomplished nobody loser,

Enough of the insults.

No. You are asking for them.

Well now I'm asking you to stop them, please.

and you're one among millions. Your ego
needs something to make you feel "special", so you went out and found something.

"veganism" is not a thought-out position. It's a choice people make
*SELF-CONSCIOUSLY* to try to create a persona.

For me it's not a choice. I cannot go against my principles any more than you can,
Usual Suspect.

Posted via a free Usenet account from