"Richard Miller" > wrote in message
...

> A racist and a paedophile. One of those occasions when I wish the "kill
> author" function was literal.

Careful Richard. We will be agreeing again!

--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

In message >, Ophelia
> writes
>
>
>"Richard Miller" > wrote in message
...
>
>> A racist and a paedophile. One of those occasions when I wish the
>>"kill author" function was literal.
>
>Careful Richard. We will be agreeing again!
>
>--

Perhaps we're not so different after all. :-)
--
Richard Miller

On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 08:54:35 +0100, "Ophelia" >
wrote:

>
>
> "Richard Miller" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > A racist and a paedophile. One of those occasions when I wish the "kill
> > author" function was literal.
>
> Careful Richard. We will be agreeing again!
>
hushmail is the new manlymail... just another troll.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf > wrote in :

> On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 08:54:35 +0100, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "Richard Miller" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> > A racist and a paedophile. One of those occasions when I wish the "kill
>> > author" function was literal.
>>
>> Careful Richard. We will be agreeing again!
>>
> hushmail is the new manlymail... just another troll.
>



And look at that...... it's sucked two stupid Poms in.



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer
gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk,
blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken
bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-
pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das
blinkenlichten

"PeterL." > wrote in message
5...
> sf > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Sat, 4 Sep 2010 08:54:35 +0100, "Ophelia" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Richard Miller" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>> > A racist and a paedophile. One of those occasions when I wish the
>>> > "kill
>>> > author" function was literal.
>>>
>>> Careful Richard. We will be agreeing again!
>>>
>> hushmail is the new manlymail... just another troll.
>>
>
>
>
> And look at that...... it's sucked two stupid Poms in.

So, 'Poms' are stupid Peter? Is that because you can't think of any 'Poms'
who frequent RFC who are on speaking terms with you?Your hypocrisy, double
standards and obvious poor memory really is something to behold.


> Peter Lucas
> Brisbane
> Australia
>
> ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer
> gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk,
> blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken
> bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-
> pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das
> blinkenlichten

--
Oats

On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 18:21:55 +1000, "Oatis Willy PIO"
> wrote:

> So, 'Poms' are stupid Peter?
^^^^^

Sorry, Charlie - you missed the boat. It's no insult if you use a
word we're not familiar with.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 18:21:55 +1000, "Oatis Willy PIO"
> > wrote:
>
> > So, 'Poms' are stupid Peter?
> ^^^^^
>
> Sorry, Charlie - you missed the boat. It's no insult if you use a
> word we're not familiar with.

GIYF

And some people even have dictionaries! It's in my US dictionary:

noun ( pl. -mies) Austral./NZ, informal offensive
a British person.

First I looked up "Pom". It's short for "Pommy". So I double-clicked
on it and got the above definition.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

sf wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 18:21:55 +1000, "Oatis Willy PIO"
> > wrote:
>
>> So, 'Poms' are stupid Peter?
> ^^^^^
>
> Sorry, Charlie - you missed the boat. It's no insult if you use a
> word we're not familiar with.
>
I've heard the term used enough to recognize it.

On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:20:06 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:

> GIYF

Not interested. If I have to look it up, it ain't no insult.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 18:21:55 +1000, "Oatis Willy PIO"
> > wrote:
>
>> So, 'Poms' are stupid Peter?
> ^^^^^
>
> Sorry, Charlie - you missed the boat. It's no insult if you use a
> word we're not familiar with.

Can you clarify your point a little please? Especially the "we're" bit?
I'm not entirely understanding your point, because:

- I replied directly to the poster who used the term 'Pom' - and clearly my
reply was directed at the same poster. Presumably, since THEY used the term,
is it not reasonable to assume that they ALSO understand it's meaning and
hence my reply to same?

- 'Pom' is also an old and very well known dergotaory term for the British
in some countries. I'm not from any of those countries and yet I have heard
the term many times before.

- Which again leads to the big question: where do you or your insular
world-view fit into any of this?

No, I am not expecting a straight or honest answer.
--
Oats

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:20:06 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
>> GIYF
>
> Not interested. If I have to look it up, it ain't no insult.

I guess you have no idea how that attitude will appear to other readers in
these groups. It is exactly the type of thing that helps perpetuate some of
the negative traits frequently levelled at Americans.

--
Oats

On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 12:20:06 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 18:21:55 +1000, "Oatis Willy PIO"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> So, 'Poms' are stupid Peter?
>> ^^^^^
>>
>> Sorry, Charlie - you missed the boat. It's no insult if you use a
>> word we're not familiar with.
>
> GIYF
>
> And some people even have dictionaries! It's in my US dictionary:
>
> noun ( pl. -mies) Austral./NZ, informal offensive
> a British person.
>
> First I looked up "Pom". It's short for "Pommy". So I double-clicked
> on it and got the above definition.

i thought 'pommy' was always heard as part of the phrase 'pommy *******.'

your pal,
blake

sf > wrote in news:hfn7865sht9ij0fisv2epld33112lh3f2o@
4ax.com:

> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 18:21:55 +1000, "Oatis Willy PIO"
> > wrote:
>
>> So, 'Poms' are stupid Peter?
> ^^^^^
>
> Sorry, Charlie - you missed the boat. It's no insult if you use a
> word we're not familiar with.
>



Please bear in mind you are talking to the stalker/troll.

It's using the ID/name of a genuine poster from the PTSD newsgroup......

Otis Willie PIO The American War Library >


Which just goes to show the truly pathetic nature, and mental deficiency
of "Jeßus", the person making all these posts.


Karma is a wonderful thing, and one day, it will catch up to "Jeßus".

--
Peter (Karma) Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer
gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk,
blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken
bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-
pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das
blinkenlichten

On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 04:19:28 GMT, PLucas
> wrote:

> Please bear in mind you are talking to the stalker/troll.

That was obvious by the name alone.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf > wrote in :

> On Wed, 08 Sep 2010 04:19:28 GMT, PLucas
> > wrote:
>
>> Please bear in mind you are talking to the stalker/troll.
>
> That was obvious by the name alone.
>


So why perpetuate it?



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer
gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk,
blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken
bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-
pickenen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das
blinkenlichten

Captain Peter Swallows mumbled around the meat:

> Please bear in mind you are talking to the stalker/troll.
<snip>
> "Jeßus", the person making all these posts.


Wait a minute! I thought you said that *I* was Oats!

Just lashing out blindly and stupidly, aren't you?

Bob

sf wrote:

>> Please bear in mind you are talking to the stalker/troll.
>
> That was obvious by the name alone.

Which name are you talking about, Peter Lucas, or Oatis Willy PIO? Because
as Swallows mentioned in her last post, Oatis *is* a real poster who writes
in the PTSD group. And it's pretty well established that everybody who posts
as Peter Lucas (or PLucas or PL or whatever permutation she chooses these
days) is pretty ****ing worthless.

Bob

On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 19:41:12 -0700, Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> sf wrote:
>
>>> Please bear in mind you are talking to the stalker/troll.
>>
>> That was obvious by the name alone.
>
> Which name are you talking about, Peter Lucas, or Oatis Willy PIO? Because
> as Swallows mentioned in her last post, Oatis *is* a real poster who writes
> in the PTSD group. And it's pretty well established that everybody who posts
> as Peter Lucas (or PLucas or PL or whatever permutation she chooses these
> days) is pretty ****ing worthless.
>
> Bob

you are correct, sir.

your pal,
blake