"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you
> > >> >> >do while still eating animals.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> No, you can't.
> > >> >
> > >> >Yes I can.
> > >>
> > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees.
> > >
> > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here.
> >
> > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased
> indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit
> that I have no clue about.
>
You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
and tried to make it look as though I wrote it in answer
to your above challenge. My original answer to your
challenge was, "Fallen apples and mustard cress."

[start Dutch]
>I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here.
[Me]
Fallen apples and mustard cress.
[end]

Thanks for showing your complete lack of honesty
and a readiness to alter the answers given by your
opponents to suit yourself, Dutch.

> > >I'll improve
> > >on it by replacing some of the plant based foods with meat.
> > >
> > Go on then.
>
> Take one pound of any of it and replace it with freshly caught fish.
>
> There you go, read it and weep.
>
At what; your dishonesty? Why should I weep over that?

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you
> > > >> >> >do while still eating animals.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > >>
> > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees.
> > > >
> > > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here.
> > >
> > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased
> > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some
shit
> > that I have no clue about.
> >
> You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat

You lied about what you eat.

You snip unethically in almost every post.

Your whole approach to this debate is a mockery.

Now go **** yourself.

"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than
> > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called
> > > > >> guarantees.
> > > > >
> > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > list here.
> > > >
> > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > clue about.
> > >
> > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
>
> You lied about what you eat.
>
You have no way of knowing that, yet you wrote
a list of goods which I don't eat, giving the reader
an impression I have admitted to eating non-vegan
food. Apart from showing your utter dishonesty,
you've also shown that your original challenge and
guarantee was bogus.

> Now go **** yourself.
>
Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than
> > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals.
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called
> > > > > >> guarantees.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > list here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > clue about.
> > > >
> > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> >
> > You lied about what you eat.
> >
> You have no way of knowing that,

I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples and mustard
cress. You lied. You have NO sense of the ethics of a forum like this.

yet you wrote
> a list of goods which I don't eat, giving the reader
> an impression I have admitted to eating non-vegan
> food.

So what? You deliberately lied about your grocery list. You repeatedly snip
relevant text *without noting* in order to leave the impression that I said
the opposite of what I actually say. I just did it more flagrantly.

> Apart from showing your utter dishonesty,
> you've also shown that your original challenge and
> guarantee was bogus.

I showed how easy it is to make a mockery of the process here. Your
arguments are corrupt, your thinking process is corrupt, and your methods
are corrupt.

> > Now go **** yourself.
> >
> Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?

My challenge is still sitting there, and you'll just keep lying and using
disreputable techniques to avoid addressing it. You're a disreputable, lying
cocksucker. What's that like?

"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than
> > > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals.
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called
> > > > > > >> guarantees.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > > list here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > > clue about.
> > > > >
> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > >
> > > You lied about what you eat.
> > >
> > You have no way of knowing that,
>
> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> and mustard cress.

Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.

> You lied. You have NO sense of the ethics of a forum like this.
>
Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to
suit his own argument.

> > yet you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving
> > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating
> > non-vegan food.
>
> So what?

You have no credibilty as an honest participant in
Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post.
The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself
proves my point even further when I say you have
no credibility.
>
> > Apart from showing your utter dishonesty,
> > you've also shown that your original challenge and
> > guarantee was bogus.
>
> I showed how easy it is to make a mockery of the
> process here.

Again, that's no reason to edit your opponent's
reply to include no-vegan foods. You have no
excuse for it.

> Your arguments are corrupt, your thinking process
> is corrupt, and your methods are corrupt.
>
Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to
suit his own argument.

> > > Now go **** yourself.
> > >
> > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?
>
> My challenge is still sitting there

I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called
challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to
include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for
you.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch"
> wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than
> > > > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals.
> > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called
> > > > > > > >> guarantees.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > > > list here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > > > clue about.
> > > > > >
> > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > > >
> > > > You lied about what you eat.
> > > >
> > > You have no way of knowing that,
> >
> > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > and mustard cress.
>
> Whether you believe my answer or not

Why did you lie? What moral authority does that leave you with?

> is no excuse for
> dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.

It's a very good illustration of how a person can play games to make things
appear not what they are. It was intended to send you a message, it did.

> > You lied. You have NO sense of the ethics of a forum like this.
> >
> Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to
> suit his own argument.

That was too obvious to be a serious attempt at fraud. Your attempts to make
us think this sock puppet ipse dixit wasn't always you is real fraud. You
are the soul of hypocrisy.

> > > yet you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving
> > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating
> > > non-vegan food.
> >
> > So what?
>
> You have no credibilty as an honest participant in
> Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post.
> The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself
> proves my point even further when I say you have
> no credibility.

No it doesn't, you're a total moron, I was yanking your chain. Typical of
your methods and your superficial view of everything that you would think
you can exploit it as if it were a real attempt to be dishonest.

> > > Apart from showing your utter dishonesty,
> > > you've also shown that your original challenge and
> > > guarantee was bogus.
> >
> > I showed how easy it is to make a mockery of the
> > process here.
>
> Again, that's no reason to edit your opponent's
> reply to include no-vegan foods. You have no
> excuse for it.

I have every justification to engage in REAL deception, based on YOUR
dishonest, unethical nature, but instead I made this *obvious* attempt to
send a message to you. You're the complete fraud DEREK, and you're a hostile
participant here, you have no right to expect to be treated ethically.

I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you.

> > Your arguments are corrupt, your thinking process
> > is corrupt, and your methods are corrupt.
> >
> Says the fraud who edits his opponent's replies to
> suit his own argument.

Takes a fraud to know one, Derek/Ipse Dixit/ and how many other sock
puppets...
>
> > > > Now go **** yourself.
> > > >
> > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?
> >
> > My challenge is still sitting there
>
> I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called
> challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to
> include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for
> you.

What a ****ing whiny loser. You can dish it out but you sure can't take it.
You long ago lost any right you ever had to be treated as a normal person.

"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> >> > I guarantee that I could do better than
> > > > > > > > >> >> > whatever you do while still eating animals.
> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called
> > > > > > > > >> guarantees.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > > > > list here.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > > > > clue about.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > > > >
> > > > > You lied about what you eat.
> > > > >
> > > > You have no way of knowing that,
> > >
> > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > > and mustard cress.
> >
> > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
>
> > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving
> > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating
> > > > non-vegan food.
> > >
> > > So what?
> >
> > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in
> > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post.
> > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself
> > proves my point even further when I say you have
> > no credibility.
>
> I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you.
>
I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have
no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate
if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit.
The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves
my point even further when I say you have no credibility.
The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent
proves you're a troll, too.

> > > > > Now go **** yourself.
> > > > >
> > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?
> > >
> > > My challenge is still sitting there
> >
> > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called
> > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to
> > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for
> > you.
>
> What a ****ing whiny loser.

What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch? I've
successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar
who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's
replies in order to change the argument in your favour.
I've gained a success while showing you've reached a
new low. What could be better?

"Ipse dixit" > wrote\
> "Dutch" > wrote

etc..
> > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > > > > > list here.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > > > > > clue about.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You lied about what you eat.
> > > > > >
> > > > > You have no way of knowing that,
> > > >
> > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > > > and mustard cress.
> > >
> > > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> > > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.

Why did you snip this comment WITHOUT NOTING you shitbag?

[me]
"Why did you lie? What moral authority does that leave you with?"

Why DID you lie? Don't snip this, you ****faced coward, answer it.

> > > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving
> > > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating
> > > > > non-vegan food.
> > > >
> > > > So what?
> > >
> > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in
> > > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post.
> > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself
> > > proves my point even further when I say you have
> > > no credibility.
> >
> > I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you.
> >
> I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have
> no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate
> if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit.

Credible arguments have no effect on you. You can't recognize them.
Dishonesty is all you understand.

> The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves
> my point even further when I say you have no credibility.

What do you mean I can't see it? I wrote it. Everyone can see it.

> The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent
> proves you're a troll, too.

Not "my opponent", dickwad, YOU! You are not a serious "opponent" except in
the sense that I oppose idiocy.


> > > > > > Now go **** yourself.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?
> > > >
> > > > My challenge is still sitting there
> > >
> > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called
> > > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to
> > > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for
> > > you.
> >
> > What a ****ing whiny loser.
>
> What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch?

Good point, you have very little credibility to lose.

I've
> successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar
> who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's
> replies in order to change the argument in your favour.
> I've gained a success while showing you've reached a
> new low. What could be better?

You haven't done anything, except show yourself to be a liar and a cheat. My
obvious ploy proves nothing about me, you know it, and so does everyone
else.

Why did you lie about the contents of your weekly grocery list? What are you
afraid of?

Why do you unethically snip your opponents' comments out of your reply
without a single notation? Who the **** do you think you are? Why won't you
respond honestly to anything? Why are you such an unethical dirtbag? What do
you get out of it?

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote:

>
>"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
>> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
>> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
>> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
>> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
>> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:

[snip]

>> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
>> > > > > > > list here.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
>> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
>> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
>> > > > > > clue about.
>> > > > >
>> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
>> > >
>> > > You lied about what you eat.
>> > >
>> > You have no way of knowing that,
>>
>> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
>> and mustard cress.
>
>Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
>dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.

Sidebar:

*If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable
"free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others
think you eat.

And that aint mind-reading,

-- swamp

Dipsey Dreckshit wrote:

> "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
>
>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote in message ...
>>
>>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you
>>>>>>>>do while still eating animals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>No, you can't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes I can.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees.
>>>>
>>>>I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here.
>>>
>>Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased
>>indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with some shit
>>that I have no clue about.
>>
>
> You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat

No. You eat factory farm raised produce, daily.

I believe you eat animal products as well, if not meat
itself.

"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote\
> > "Dutch" > wrote
>
> etc..
> > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > > > > > > list here.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > > > > > > clue about.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You lied about what you eat.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > You have no way of knowing that,
> > > > >
> > > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > > > > and mustard cress.
> > > >
> > > > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> > > > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
>
> Why did you snip this comment WITHOUT NOTING you shitbag?
>
Non sequitur. Whether you believe my answer or not is no
excuse for dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan
food.

> > > > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving
> > > > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating
> > > > > > non-vegan food.
> > > > >
> > > > > So what?
> > > >
> > > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in
> > > > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post.
> > > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself
> > > > proves my point even further when I say you have
> > > > no credibility.
> > >
> > > I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy you.
> > >
> > I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have
> > no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate
> > if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit.
>
> Credible arguments have no effect on you.

Do you honestly think that editing your opponent's
replies, as I caught you doing to mine, are "credible"
arguments, Ditch? You're more delusional than you've
been letting on about.
>
> > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves
> > my point even further when I say you have no credibility.
>
> What do you mean I can't see it? I wrote it. Everyone can see it.
>
Yes, they can. They can all see where you edited my reply;

"Fallen apples and mustard cress"

to

"Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased
indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and eggs, along with
some shit that I have no clue about"

How's about that for sheer dishonesty and a lack of
any credibilty? And you call this a "Credible argument"?

> > The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent
> > proves you're a troll, too.
>
> Not "my opponent", dickwad, YOU!

I am your opponent, or haven't you fathomed that out
yet? If your intention is but to annoy your opponent by
editing his posts to include non-vegan foods in his
replies to you, how would you defend this troll like
behaviour as a "credible argument"?

> > > > > > > Now go **** yourself.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?
> > > > >
> > > > > My challenge is still sitting there
> > > >
> > > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called
> > > > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to
> > > > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for
> > > > you.
> > >
> > > What a ****ing whiny loser.
> >
> > What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch?
>
> Good point, you have very little credibility to lose.
>
I have more credibility than those who edit their
opponent's replies, so that a good virtue I've held
on to. It's a pity for you you didn't hold on to yours
though, but that's life.

> > I've
> > successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar
> > who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's
> > replies in order to change the argument in your favour.
> > I've gained a success while showing you've reached a
> > new low. What could be better?
>
> You haven't done anything, except show yourself to
> be a liar and a cheat.

How, by editing my replies? Well done!

"swamp" > wrote in message ...
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
> >"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> >> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> >> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> >> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> >> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> >> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> >> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> >> > > > > > > list here.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> >> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> >> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> >> > > > > > clue about.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> >> > >
> >> > > You lied about what you eat.
> >> > >
> >> > You have no way of knowing that,
> >>
> >> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> >> and mustard cress.
> >
> >Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> >dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
>
> Sidebar:
>
> *If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable
> "free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others
> think you eat.
>
This is irrelevant to my complaint about Dutch's editing
of my replies to include non-vegan foods. He has no
excuse for using dishonest tactics to help weaken his
opponent's position in this way. It's a new low for him
and shows he is thoroughly incapable.

"Bill" > wrote in message ink.net...
> "Ipse dixit" wrote:
> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> >>"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> >>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>>>"Ipse > wrote
> >>>>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>>>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote
> >>>>>>>On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>I guarantee that I could do better than
> >>>>>>>>whatever you do while still eating animals.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>No, you can't.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Yes I can.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called
> >>>>>guarantees.
> >>>>
> >>>>I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> >>>>list here.
> >>>
> >>Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> >>purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
> >>milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> >>clue about.
> >
> > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
>
> No.

My original answer was, "Fallen apples and mustard
cress", but, as you can see for yourself, Dutch has
removed my reply and replaced it with a list of
non-vegan foods. You know this already, but as usual
you can't stop yourself from lying and making a fool of
yourself.

I'm not surprised you don't find any fault in Dutch's
dishonest tactics, because it was only a short while
ago when you were caught forging your opponents
posts by using their identity. Honour amongst liars,
cheats and trolls - is that it?

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>

snippage...

>
> Do you honestly think that editing your opponent's
> replies, as I caught you doing to mine, are "credible"
> arguments, Ditch? You're more delusional than you've
> been letting on about.
=======================
What a hoot! The ignorant king of unethical snipping is complaining about
somebody's annotated snips!!!
You really are too much, twits... Too ignorant, too stupid, too lazy, too
full of lys....


snippage...

"rick etter" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> >
"Do you accept that the *general* production, storage, and
distribution of grass fed beef accumulates any collateral
deaths, Rick Etter?"

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>

snippage...

>
> I'm not surprised you don't find any fault in Dutch's
> dishonest tactics,
=====================
bwahahahahahahah
What a hoot! You're the blackest pot in the group, you ignorant,
hypocritical fool!






because it was only a short while
> ago when you were caught forging your opponents
> posts by using their identity. Honour amongst liars,
> cheats and trolls - is that it?
>
>

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote\
> > > "Dutch" > wrote
> >
> > etc..
> > > > > > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > > > > > > > list here.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > > > > > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > > > > > > > clue about.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You lied about what you eat.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You have no way of knowing that,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > > > > > and mustard cress.
> > > > >
> > > > > Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> > > > > dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
> >
> > Why did you snip this comment WITHOUT NOTING you shitbag?
> >
> Non sequitur.

It's completely relevant shitbag.

> Whether you believe my answer or not

Your answer is a lie.

> is no
> excuse for dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan
> food.

It's a perfectly good reason, as if I need one. Your unethical snippage,
misrepresentations, and all the rest of your dishonest behaviour are enough
reason.

You have NO business complaining about anything, shitbag.
>
> > > > > > > you wrote a list of goods which I don't eat, giving
> > > > > > > the reader an impression I have admitted to eating
> > > > > > > non-vegan food.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So what?
> > > > >
> > > > > You have no credibilty as an honest participant in
> > > > > Usenet debate if you alter your opponent's post.
> > > > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself
> > > > > proves my point even further when I say you have
> > > > > no credibility.
> > > >
> > > > I'll do it more, I'll do it all the time since it seems to annoy
you.
> > > >
> > > I'm sure you will, because as I said before, "you have
> > > no credibilty as an honest participant in Usenet debate
> > > if all you can do is alter your opponent's posts to suit.
> >
> > Credible arguments have no effect on you.
>
> Do you honestly think that editing your opponent's
> replies, as I caught you doing to mine, are "credible"
> arguments, Ditch? You're more delusional than you've
> been letting on about.

That's not what I said, moron.


> > > The fact that you cannot see this cheat for yourself proves
> > > my point even further when I say you have no credibility.
> >
> > What do you mean I can't see it? I wrote it. Everyone can see it.
> >
> Yes, they can. They can all see where you edited my reply;
>
> "Fallen apples and mustard cress"
>
> to
>
> "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased
> indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and eggs, along with
> some shit that I have no clue about"
>
> How's about that for sheer dishonesty and a lack of
> any credibilty? And you call this a "Credible argument"?
>
> > > The fact that you'll do it just to annoy your opponent
> > > proves you're a troll, too.
> >
> > Not "my opponent", dickwad, YOU!
>
> I am your opponent, or haven't you fathomed that out
> yet? If your intention is but to annoy your opponent by
> editing his posts to include non-vegan foods in his
> replies to you, how would you defend this troll like
> behaviour as a "credible argument"?

You're an idiot.

> > > > > > > > Now go **** yourself.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why don't you grow up and stop lying, Dutch?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My challenge is still sitting there
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think anyone need bother with your so-called
> > > > > challenges if all you can do is edit their responses to
> > > > > include non-vegan foods. This is a new low, even for
> > > > > you.
> > > >
> > > > What a ****ing whiny loser.
> > >
> > > What am I supposed to have lost here, Dutch?
> >
> > Good point, you have very little credibility to lose.
> >
> I have more credibility than those who edit their
> opponent's replies, so that a good virtue I've held
> on to. It's a pity for you you didn't hold on to yours
> though, but that's life.

You have ZERO, naught, nada. Nobody on either side cares what you say.

>
> > > I've
> > > successfully shown that you are a cheat and a liar
> > > who's desperate enough to edit your opponent's
> > > replies in order to change the argument in your favour.
> > > I've gained a success while showing you've reached a
> > > new low. What could be better?
> >
> > You haven't done anything, except show yourself to
> > be a liar and a cheat.
>
> How, by editing my replies? Well done!

You're even more incoherent than usual. Better change those meds.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
news
>
> "swamp" > wrote in message
...
> > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
> > >"Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > >> > "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > >> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > >> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > >> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > >> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > >> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch"
> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > >> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch"
> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > >> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > >> > > > > > > list here.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > >> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, >
> > >> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > >> > > > > > clue about.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > >> > >
> > >> > > You lied about what you eat.
> > >> > >
> > >> > You have no way of knowing that,
> > >>
> > >> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > >> and mustard cress.
> > >
> > >Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> > >dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
> >
> > Sidebar:
> >
> > *If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable
> > "free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others
> > think you eat.
> >
> This is irrelevant to my complaint about Dutch's editing
> of my replies to include non-vegan foods. He has no
> excuse for using dishonest tactics to help weaken his
> opponent's position in this way.

Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it. It
was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
**** and you know it.

Do you think you're talking to children Dreck?

It's a new low for him
> and shows he is thoroughly incapable.

You're pathetic Dreck.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bill" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> > "Ipse dixit" wrote:
> > > "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > >>"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > >>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > >>>>"Ipse > wrote
> > >>>>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > >>>>>>Dipsey Dreckshit > wrote
> > >>>>>>>On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>I guarantee that I could do better than
> > >>>>>>>>whatever you do while still eating animals.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>No, you can't.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Yes I can.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called
> > >>>>>guarantees.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > >>>>list here.
> > >>>
> > >>Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > >>purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
> > >>milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > >>clue about.
> > >
> > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> >
> > No.
>
> My original answer was, "Fallen apples and mustard
> cress", but, as you can see for yourself, Dutch has
> removed my reply and replaced it with a list of
> non-vegan foods. You know this already, but as usual
> you can't stop yourself from lying and making a fool of
> yourself.
>
> I'm not surprised you don't find any fault in Dutch's
> dishonest tactics, because it was only a short while
> ago when you were caught forging your opponents
> posts by using their identity. Honour amongst liars,
> cheats and trolls - is that it?

I was taking the **** Dreck, thumbing my nose at your constant unethical
editing, everyone knows it.

You're getting waaay too easy.

"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message news
> > "swamp" > wrote in message ...
> > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:43:18 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
> > > >"Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > >> > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > >> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > >> > > > "Dutch" > wrote in message ...
> > > >> > > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > >> > > > > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > >> > > > > > > list here.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > >> > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
> > > >> > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > >> > > > > > clue about.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > You lied about what you eat.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > You have no way of knowing that,
> > > >>
> > > >> I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > > >> and mustard cress.
> > > >
> > > >Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> > > >dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
> > >
> > > Sidebar:
> > >
> > > *If* you believed the farmer/rancher were the morally culpable
> > > "free-agent" as you claim, you'd have no concern about what others
> > > think you eat.
> > >
> > This is irrelevant to my complaint about Dutch's editing
> > of my replies to include non-vegan foods. He has no
> > excuse for using dishonest tactics to help weaken his
> > opponent's position in this way.
>
> Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it. It
> was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> **** and you know it.
>
That's very easy to say after been shown your
dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
caught while forging posts using their opponent's
identity. There is no excuse for editing your
opponent's replies, in the same way that there is
no excuse to forge posts using an apponent's
identity. You're all as dishonest as each other.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>

snippage...


> >
> > Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it.
It
> > was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking
the
> > **** and you know it.
> >
> That's very easy to say after been shown your
> dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> opponent's replies,
========================
maybe you should follow your own advice there fool. You really are that
stupid, aren't you?




in the same way that there is
> no excuse to forge posts using an apponent's
> identity. You're all as dishonest as each other.
>
>

"rick etter" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > >
> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> > > **** and you know it.
> > >
> > That's very easy to say after been shown your
> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> > opponent's replies,
> ========================
> maybe you should follow your own advice there

I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
to the anti side of these animal related groups.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "rick etter" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > >
> > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
> > > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
> > > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> > > > **** and you know it.
> > > >
> > > That's very easy to say after been shown your
> > > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> > > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> > > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> > > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> > > opponent's replies,
> > ========================
> > maybe you should follow your own advice there
>
> I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> to the anti side of these animal related groups.
=====================
Unethical, unannotated snipping is just as deceitful, you ignorant fool.
It's part-n-parcel of thye same thing. You've been caught, you're a lazy,
ignorant hypocritical killer.

Go have that nice blood-drenched dinner, killer...

"rick etter" > wrote in message ...
> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> >> > "rick etter" > wrote in message ...
> > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
> > > > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
> > > > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> > > > > **** and you know it.
> > > > >
> > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your
> > > > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> > > > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> > > > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> > > > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> > > > opponent's replies,
> > > ========================
> > > maybe you should follow your own advice there
> >
> > I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> > or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> > to the anti side of these animal related groups.
> =====================
> Unethical, unannotated snipping is just as deceitful

Snipping away irrelevant parts of a discussion is
usual and perfectly legitimate. Dutch edited my
reply to his challenge from;

"Fallen apples and mustard cress"

to

"Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk
and eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue
about"

Now that's unethical. He tried to cheat and include
a list of non-vegan foods in place of the list I provided.
He has no credibility.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote

> > Even if your position could get any weaker, that wouldn't have done it.
It
> > was obvious, it was never intended to be anything but an obvious taking
the
> > **** and you know it.
> >
> That's very easy to say after been shown your
> dishonesty,

There was no attempt to conceal it, moron, unlike your shady snipping and
nym-shifting.

> and I remember that Jonathan and
> Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> opponent's replies, in the same way that there is
> no excuse to forge posts using an apponent's
> identity. You're all as dishonest as each other.

Give it up ding-dong. You're WAAAAY too unethical a poster to be whining
about such things.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "rick etter" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > >> > "rick etter" > wrote in message
...
> > > > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
> > > > > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
> > > > > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> > > > > > **** and you know it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > That's very easy to say after been shown your
> > > > > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> > > > > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> > > > > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> > > > > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> > > > > opponent's replies,
> > > > ========================
> > > > maybe you should follow your own advice there
> > >
> > > I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> > > or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> > > to the anti side of these animal related groups.
> > =====================
> > Unethical, unannotated snipping is just as deceitful
>
> Snipping away irrelevant parts of a discussion is
> usual and perfectly legitimate.
====================
Not when it is unannotaed, and made to look like that was the complete
reply.
That's the same as changing the remarks, you ignorant dolt.


Dutch edited my
> reply to his challenge from;
=====================
LOL
If it's perfectly OK, then why did you rant about what he had done, you
ignorant fool?


>
> "Fallen apples and mustard cress"
>
> to
>
> "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk
> and eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue
> about"
>
> Now that's unethical. He tried to cheat and include
> a list of non-vegan foods in place of the list I provided.
> He has no credibility.
>
>

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote:

>
>"rick etter" > wrote in message ...
>> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>> > >
>> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
>> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
>> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
>> > > **** and you know it.
>> > >
>> > That's very easy to say after been shown your
>> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
>> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
>> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
>> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
>> > opponent's replies,
>> ========================
>> maybe you should follow your own advice there
>
>I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
>or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
>to the anti side of these animal related groups.

I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, however in this
case I interpretted Dutch's response as a barb, and not offered as an
accurate description of your grocery list. *If* I'm following the
discussion correctly, neither your claim of "fallen apples and mustard
cress" nor his response of "factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and
vegetables purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and
eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue about" were meant to be
taken seriously. Tongue-in-cheek remarks aren't lies or dishonesty.

Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest
you're hiding something.

-- swamp

"swamp" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"rick etter" > wrote in message
...
> >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> >> > >
> >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
> >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
> >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> >> > > **** and you know it.
> >> > >
> >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your
> >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> >> > opponent's replies,
> >> ========================
> >> maybe you should follow your own advice there
> >
> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> >to the anti side of these animal related groups.
>
> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics, however in this
> case I interpretted Dutch's response as a barb,

It was intended to convey my displeasure with his unethical snipping habits.

> and not offered as an
> accurate description of your grocery list.

Actually, I believe it *was* accurate, certainly much closer to the truth
than his effort.

> *If* I'm following the
> discussion correctly, neither your claim of "fallen apples and mustard
> cress" nor his response of "factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and
> vegetables purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, milk and
> eggs, along with some shit that I have no clue about" were meant to be
> taken seriously. Tongue-in-cheek remarks aren't lies or dishonesty.

He knows that, he's a desperate, wanking slob.

> Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest
> you're hiding something.

I'm guessing Nash is a full-on omnivore. He's probably having veal cutlets
for dinner tonight.

"swamp" > wrote in message ...
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
> >"rick etter" > wrote in message ...
> >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
> >> > >
> >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
> >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
> >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> >> > > **** and you know it.
> >> > >
> >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your
> >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> >> > opponent's replies,
> >> ========================
> >> maybe you should follow your own advice there
> >
> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> >to the anti side of these animal related groups.
>
> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics,

Then give an example where the AR side in these
animal related groups have forged posts using
their opponent's identity.


> however in this case I interpretted Dutch's response
> as a barb, and not offered as an accurate description
> of your grocery list.

I don't care how you interpret it, Swamp. The
fact is that Dutch edited my reply to a challenge
he offered from this;

"Fallen apples and mustard cress"

to

"Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
clue about"

That's about as dishonest as you can get.

> Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest
> you're hiding something.
>
I have no desire to discuss my weekly grocery
lists with the likes of you or Dutch. My answer
was irrelevant since I could've insisted I was
fasting, for instance, and didn't have a grocery
list to offer. Dutch's editing of my list, whatever
I chose to put in it, is a dishonest cheat on his
part and shows his total lack of any honour or
credibility.

"Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
>
> "swamp" > wrote in message
...
> > On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
> > >"rick etter" > wrote in message
...
> > >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
> > >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
> > >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
> > >> > > **** and you know it.
> > >> > >
> > >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your
> > >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
> > >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
> > >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
> > >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
> > >> > opponent's replies,
> > >> ========================
> > >> maybe you should follow your own advice there
> > >
> > >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> > >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> > >to the anti side of these animal related groups.
> >
> > I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics,
>
> Then give an example where the AR side in these
> animal related groups have forged posts using
> their opponent's identity.
>
>
> > however in this case I interpretted Dutch's response
> > as a barb, and not offered as an accurate description
> > of your grocery list.
>
> I don't care how you interpret it, Swamp. The
> fact is that Dutch edited my reply to a challenge
> he offered from this;
>
> "Fallen apples and mustard cress"
>
> to
>
> "Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
> milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> clue about"
>
> That's about as dishonest as you can get.

My post was an obvious poke in the eye, there was nothing dishonest about
it.. Yours was a blatant lie.

> > Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest
> > you're hiding something.
> >
> I have no desire to discuss my weekly grocery
> lists with the likes of you or Dutch.

Then you should have said, "I respectfully decline to reveal what I eat on
the grounds it may incriminate me."

> My answer
> was irrelevant since I could've insisted I was
> fasting, for instance, and didn't have a grocery
> list to offer.

Yes, being a reflexive liar you could have said almost anything.

> Dutch's editing of my list, whatever
> I chose to put in it, is a dishonest cheat on his
> part and shows his total lack of any honour or
> credibility.

You wish.

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote:

>
>"swamp" > wrote in message ...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:05:08 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
>> >"rick etter" > wrote in message ...
>> >> "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message ...
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Even if your position could get any weaker, that
>> >> > > wouldn't have done it. It was obvious, it was never
>> >> > > intended to be anything but an obvious taking the
>> >> > > **** and you know it.
>> >> > >
>> >> > That's very easy to say after been shown your
>> >> > dishonesty, and I remember that Jonathan and
>> >> > Kevin tried a similar excuse to yours after being
>> >> > caught while forging posts using their opponent's
>> >> > identity. There is no excuse for editing your
>> >> > opponent's replies,
>> >> ========================
>> >> maybe you should follow your own advice there
>> >
>> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
>> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
>> >to the anti side of these animal related groups.
>>
>> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics,
>
>Then give an example where the AR side in these
>animal related groups have forged posts using
>their opponent's identity.

You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular
basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is
poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge,
incompetently. Then there's the nymshifters like yourself and "pearl."

>> however in this case I interpretted Dutch's response
>> as a barb, and not offered as an accurate description
>> of your grocery list.
>
>I don't care how you interpret it, Swamp.

And I don't care if you care how I interpret it, Derek. Can it be put
any more simply than that? Your argument is weak, which explains your
hesitance and desperation.

My grocery list:

1 gal. milk (homogenized, full fat)
6 tomatoes (romas in season, otherwise vinas)
2 lb ground chuck
1 lb hot italian sausage
1 8 oz. can tomato paste
1 28 oz. can pinto beans
1 28 oz. can kidney beans
2 15 oz, cans crushed tomatoes
2 onions (sweet in season)
4 carrots
6 eggs (free range [I pay the extra])
4 zucchini
2 potatoes (the big brown guys)
1 loaf wheat bread
1 12-pack Pacifico beer
18 oz. salsa fresca (mercado local, sabrosa)
1 8 oz. can El Pato Salsa Mexicana

I hate rice. Fried, Mexican, steamed, Chinese whatever. Not for ar/ev
reasons. Just don't like it.

>The fact is that Dutch edited my reply to a challenge
>he offered from this;
>
>"Fallen apples and mustard cress"
>
>to
>
>"Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
>purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
>milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
>clue about"
>
>That's about as dishonest as you can get.

No, it wasn't, and you know full well it wasn't. Post your own list if
you're really feeling so aggrieved, and provide details as to how your
local farmer avoids CDs. Your avoidance of this issue is as dishonest
as one can get. Dutch was just giving you the business.

>> Your hesitance to reveal the true contents of the list, otoh, suggest
>> you're hiding something.
>>
>I have no desire to discuss my weekly grocery
>lists with the likes of you or Dutch.

The "likes of...? " Whatever you say, Ms. Dolittle.

>My answer was irrelevant

As usual...

>since I could've insisted I was
>fasting, for instance, and didn't have a grocery
>list to offer.

But you eat, and you know what you eat. This local farmer who assures
no CDs isn't flying either, as no farmer can make that guarantee. Pony
up.

>Dutch's editing of my list, whatever
>I chose to put in it, is a dishonest cheat on his
>part and shows his total lack of any honour or
>credibility.

Coming from someone w/ a history of dishonest editting your
credibility questioning is duly ignored. I trust Dutch's integrity
much more than yours.

-- swamp

"swamp" > wrote in message ...
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:

> >> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> >> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> >> >to the anti side of these animal related groups.
> >>
> >> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics,
> >
> >Then give an example where the AR side in these
> >animal related groups have forged posts using
> >their opponent's identity.
>
> You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular
> basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is
> poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge,
> incompetently.

Right, you lying ****, show where I have EVER forged
a post using "Pete" or Malcom's" identities.

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:50:33 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
wrote:

>
>"swamp" > wrote in message ...
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
>
>> >> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
>> >> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
>> >> >to the anti side of these animal related groups.
>> >>
>> >> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics,
>> >
>> >Then give an example where the AR side in these
>> >animal related groups have forged posts using
>> >their opponent's identity.
>>
>> You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular
>> basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is
>> poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge,
>> incompetently.
>
>Right, you lying ****, show where I have EVER forged
>a post using "Pete" or Malcom's" identities.

I didn't say you forged; I said you selectively editted which you've
done once again. Thanks for another example. Pete and Malcolm are the
incompetent forgers. You're an incompetent editor.

Your grocery list...?

-- swamp

"swamp" > wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:50:33 GMT, "Ipse dixit" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"swamp" > wrote in message ...
> >> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:01:17 GMT, "Ipse dixit" > wrote:
> >
> >> >> >I don't edit my opponent's replies to suit my argument
> >> >> >or make posts using their identities. Those antics belong
> >> >> >to the anti side of these animal related groups.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd say neither "side" has a monopoly on those antics,
> >> >
> >> >Then give an example where the AR side in these
> >> >animal related groups have forged posts using
> >> >their opponent's identity.
> >>
> >> You edit your opponent's replies to suit your argument on a regular
> >> basis, and this is one of them. You need to because your position is
> >> poor. Then there's "Pete" and "Malcolm" who've attempted to forge,
> >> incompetently.
> >
> >Right, you lying ****, show where I have EVER forged
> >a post using "Pete" or Malcom's" identities.
>
> I didn't say you forged; I said you selectively editted which you've
> done once again. Thanks for another example. Pete and Malcolm are the
> incompetent forgers.

Show where, you ****ing liar.

Ipse dixit wrote:
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you
> > > >> >> >do while still eating animals.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > >>
> > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees.
> > > >
> > > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here.
> > >
> > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased
> > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with
some shit
> > that I have no clue about.
> >
> [...] My original answer to your
> challenge was, "Fallen apples and mustard cress."

Which was an utter lie, so ANYTHING said in response to it is
justified.

Shitbag.

Ipse dixit wrote:
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
...
> > "Ipse dixit" > wrote in message
...
> > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:35:22 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> > > >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:27:09 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > >> >"Ipse dixit" > wrote
> > > >> >> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:32:45 -0800, "Dutch" >
wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> >I guarantee that I could do better than whatever you
> > > >> >> >do while still eating animals.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> No, you can't.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Yes I can.
> > > >>
> > > >> No, You can't. I'm not fooled by your so-called guarantees.
> > > >
> > > >I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery list here.
> > >
> > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables purchased
> > indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese, > milk and eggs, along with
some shit
> > that I have no clue about.
> >
> [...] My original answer to your
> challenge was, "Fallen apples and mustard cress."

Which was an utter lie, so ANYTHING said in response to it is
justified.

Shitbag.