STILL WAITING ....

"pearl" > wrote in message ...
> "chico chupacabra" > wrote in message ...
> > pearl wrote:
> >
> > > > > > The buildings COMPLETELY COLLAPSED in VIRTUAL FREE FALL
> > > > > > into their own footprint. How does weakened / softened STEEL do
> > > > > > that?
> > > >
> > > > Answer the question,
> > >
> > > And before you say "gravity" again,
> >
> > It's why things fall straight down, Lesley.
>
> Only if the support is broken at multiple points throughout the
> height of the three (3) structures. There were 47 huge central
> steel support columns embedded within concrete (and with an
> external layer of insulation) in WTC 1 & 2, and 24 in WTC 7.
>
> We know that:
>
> 'The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than
> a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield
> strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still
> support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.'
> http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...agar-0112.html
>
> So what went wrong, 'chico'? Tell us how you think it happened.

WELL?

Leif Erikson wrote:

<snip>

Glorfindel wrote:

>>>> What we need to do is make public transit more attractive and encourage
>>>> more people to ride it.

>>> Why is it any of your or "society's" interest?

>> Because some people, unlike you, are concerned about less
>> fortunate people,

> Then *you* pay for their private transportation.

<snip>

In some cases, I have -- or drove them to their appointments
myself. That was one of the things I did regularly at
St. Bede's until Derek pulled his little stunt. Bede's
Backers worked with old, sick, and poor adults of the
congregation, not children, and members volunteered time
and money to help those who needed practical help, like
transportation to shopping and doctors' appointments,
food and/or cooking, furniture, Habitat for Humanity
volunteer work, and so on.

But, of course, no one person, even the wealthiest, can
help everyone who needs it, or even identify everyone
who needs help. That is what the "safety net" in society
is about: everyone joining in together to help as many
of the less fortunate as possible. It is what society
should be about. Private groups do a lot, but there is
need for public help as well.

<snip>
>> and making life better for
>> the less fortunate, the hungry, the poor, the sick, the
>> blind, the lame, widows, orphans, the poor ... you know,
>> all the people Jesus talked about.

> Oh, goody. Did Jesus talk about helping birds?

He said that not even a sparrow falls without God's
attention and concern. I think He would be concerned
for even a cockatiel.

>> Decent people do care about other human beings, and non-human
>> beings as well. You care about no one but yourself, and nothing
>> but money.

> False.

*disbelieving laughter*

"pearl" > wrote in message ...
> "chico chupacabra" > wrote in message ...
> > pearl wrote:
> >
> > >>>>>>>The buildings COMPLETELY COLLAPSED in VIRTUAL FREE FALL
> > >>>>>>>into their own footprint. How does weakened / softened STEEL do that?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Gravity. It's the law.
> > >>>>http://tinyurl.com/fttvl
> > >>>
> > >>>I knew it.
> > >>
> > >>Apparently you don't know it because you continue to reject the law of
> > >>gravity. It's why things fall straight down, Lesley.
> > >
> > > Apparently you're rejecting the law of STEEL, chumpo.
> >
> > About time
>
> You addressed the issue.

'The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than
a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield
strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still
support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.'
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...agar-0112.html

Karen Winter, child-abandoning stray cat shampooer and serial bird
diddling "anglo catholic," wrote:

> > Skanky wrote:
>
> >>> <snip>
>
> >> Hi Karen Winter. I used to make avatars for a program called
> >> 3dAnarchy/Atmosphere. It was a 3d live chat and build program.
> >> Unfortunately
>
> I'll check out your pages.

It won't take you long, not only because of the lack of substance but
because of the lack of style. For an "art" site, it sure has a dearth of
it. Not to mention amateurish HTML.

> I'm looking for an interesting
> liveChat or RPG of some kind, but haven't settled on one yet.

Who says you have to settle on one?

> Are you interested in media fandom at all, or have you
> ever attended MediaWestCon?

How many Trekkie conventions have you attended, Karen?

> Right now I'm following
> the BBC series of Sharpe movies. Intriguing characters,
> although I grumble a bit about the historical accuracy.
> The books, I'm told, are better, but I haven't gotten to
> them yet: I'm in the middle of a major research project

Hahaha!!! IOW, you're wasting your time with some inane BS that *might*
get posted online like some of the other pap you've written.

> at the moment in another area, and haven't had time.

Yet you have plenty time to waste here.

> There's a whole Age of Sail fandom going on centering
> on Hornblower ( where I have read all the books already )
> and Sharpe, and I want to get into it in some way.

"Fandom" minus "nom" equals "fad." That's the only reason you want
"into it."

> BBC has so much better programming than anything American.

You only like it because it's a state-funded operation run by people
out of touch with the mainstream of political thought, and you probably
like PBS for the same reason.

> Even the _Ring_ movies were made by an Australian -- which
> figures, since the books were written by Tolkien.

Passion of the Christ was also made by an Aussie, and Fox is owned by
one, too. Let's hear it for Australia, homeland of Rupert Murdoch and
Mel Gibson!

> All the U.S. seems to be good for today is invading other
> people's countries

And that can be a good thing. Why do you hate your country? And why do
you hate the military given the fact that your father AND your son both
served, and during wartime no less?

> and killing innocent civilians.

Shit, are you *still* mad because Tookie Williams is at room
temperature?

> <snip>
>
> >> I have a memorial page for it at
> >> http://www.scentednectar.com/atmo/index.htm
>
> >> These days I'm using ActiveWorlds as my 3d live chat and build
> >> program of choice. I don't know how to make avatars for it,
> >> but have made a
> >> lot of objects and textures.
>
> >> I have a page on it at
> >> http://www.scentednectar.com/aw/index.htm I think it's the best
>
> >> program of its kind currently out there,
> >> especially since you can build
> >> on much huger pieces of land than in the competition (like Second
> >> Life).
>
> >> The people there are generally much nicer than the trolls on
> >> the newsgroups here. You can enter, explore and chat in many of
> >> the worlds for free as a 'tourist'.
> >> A 'citizenship' is fairly cheap,
> >> with that you can build whatever you want in the public building
> >> worlds.
> >> My fave public build world is Alphaworld. It is the virtual
> >> size of California,
> >> and there is tons of open space to claim and build on.
> >> Power users buy their own (expensive) worlds,
> >> but I find my needs
> >> met by just having a cit.
> >> If you become a cit, you can also do things
> >> like whisper
> >> and send telegrams and other stuff.
> >> If you check it out,
> >> the 2 main chatting areas are Alphaworld's Ground Zero, and the
> >> Gate. Both are moderated, but if you chat with people in remote
> >> areas or whisper or telegram, it's not censored. Maybe I'll run
> >> into you there.
>
> > It sounds like Glorfindel's cup of tea
>
> Might be. I'll check it out.

Comrade Karen Winter stop diddling small animals long enough to write:

> What we need to do is make public transit

illegal.

> more attractive and
> encourage more people to ride it.

That's the last thing we should do.

> It's vital for people who can't
> drive, like blind people, the severely disabled, and old people.

It isn't vital. It would be a lot more efficient to provide them with
subsidies for taxis and such, but it's a needless drain on taxpayers to
use federal money for intracity bus service that serves less than 10%
of the population.

> Taxi scrip is an alternative, but doesn't seem to work as well --

Bullshit. It works just as well and is more efficient than paying
billions for services used by so few -- and even fewer who fit the
criteria you just gave (blind, disabled, elderly). We don't need a
whole ****ing bus system to server just those groups any more than we
need "domestic partner" coverage to fix the problem of indigent health
care.

> people I know who have had to depend on it for time-critical things,

Taxis are faster than buses, especially in cities where there's
competition between taxi companies.

> like getting to a scheduled appointment, find it frustrating because
> the driver often doesn't pick you up on time.

Why should it be anyone else's responsibility how you get from Point A
to Point B?

> I've lived in San Francisco,

We know, Karen, we know...

> which has a excellent three-system form of public transit,

You should've stayed there if it meant so much to you.

> and while I was there I sold my car and only used the public system.

BFD. Why should I be taxed in Austin, Texas, so you can take a trolly
in San Francisco at rates far, far less than it costs to actually
provide you that service?

> Unfortunately, many cities don't have a decent system.

They should only have them if they can pay for them themselves. SF may
be able to support, cities like Santa Fe and Austin can't.

> The buses/trains don't go where people need to go, so people don't
> ride them unless they absolutely must, so service gets cut, and so
> on.

Back in the early '90s, Capital Metro stopped charging fares. "Ride the
Bus for Free." That didn't cost them anything because, as I wrote
yesterday, they're already ~90% subsidized. Ridership *did* increase
somewhat. But so did the number of homeless people riding
air-conditioned buses all summer. In the end, it still didn't work. And
even on "Ozone Action Days," when there's no charge for bus service,
ridership doesn't increase at all.

> I don't mind paying taxes for public transit --

Then YOU pay voluntarily into some charity that provides transportation
for slackers like Skanky.

> it helps the people who need it,

What percentage of bus riders are actually blind, handicapped, or
elderly? BTW, Capital Metro has a special transportation unit for the
handicapped that offers door-to-door chauffeur service. How is that a
sound use of public money, Comrade Karen?

http://www.capmetro.org/riding/sts.asp#VI

> and is better than all the private cars

No, private property is far "better" than public. I know you
reflexively object to private cars, especially nice shiny new SUVs, but
those people work hard to afford them and have every ****ing right to
drive them. It's not their fault that you and Sylvia are embarrassed to
ride around in that old repainted Oldsmobuick.

> cluttering up the highways and creating pollution.

I offered you data that show public transportation is just as polluting
as automobiles per passenger mile.

> I use it if it
> goes anywhere near where I need to go,

Just like you "vegans" eat whatever you want so long as it suits your
tastes primarily, and principles only secondarily (if even that).

> and if the schedule is anywhere near reliable.

Just like you "vegans" eat whatever you want so long as it suits your
tastes primarily, and principles only secondarily (if even that).

> I'd sure rather pay for buses and trains than bombs.

Then do it. Sell your trailer and buy a bus for the handicapped,
elderly, and the blind. But don't make everyone else pay for your good
intentions.

Skanky wrote:

> > > I no longer think I'll be getting a pickup truck,
> >
> > I never thought you would anyway. They cost a lot more to own than
> > you'll ever earn.
>
> What is it you think I earn?

You're not earning much for asking people if they also want fries.

> where did you get the idea that my income is low?

From your cheapskate attitude about signing up to use another news
server, from your fantasies about winning the lottery so you can retire
on a five-acre farm with a pickup, from everything else you've written
that demonstrates your slovenly approach to life.

> > > but who knows.
> >
> > You certainly know you won't get a vehicle, you slothful degenerate
> > pothead.
> >
> > > I used to have an SUV
> >
> > Sure ya did.
>
> 4 wheel drive, riding up high.

You shouldn't drive when you're stoned, and I don't know whose vehicle
you stole and went joyriding in, but I hope they got it back in one
piece.

> It was a fun vehicle.

Did you get caught and how many years did you serve?

> > > and enjoy driving large vehicles.
> >
> > Why don't you get a job as a bus driver? It would be like killing
> > two birds with the same stone. Wait. They drug test for that
> > position. You can't work for the bus authority.
> >
> > *BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT!*
>
> Not here, they don't drug test.

Yes, they do. You lied again, Skanky.

> I'm a responsible toker.

Oxymoronic, and you're deemed too irresponsible to drive or maintain a
bus for the city of Toronto.

> [snip rant against public transportation]

It wasn't a rant, it was a series of data that showed your claims about
it were completely wrong. Why do you engage yourself in discussions and
presume that your slacker ways of life are somehow more noble or more
beneficial for things like the environment or the animals? Why do you
continue to do things that cause harm or damage even after you've been
shown to be wrong?

RESTO
It is *not* environmentally friendly, at least not in the US. If
anything, it contributes to more pollution per capita than cars do
because of the scope of public transportation systems (the ever
increasing size of such systems and the hours they run) compared to the
ever decreasing ridership. It's a wasteful abuse of taxpayer funds AND
of fuel.

Much has changed since the "efficiency" and "environment" arguments
were made for increased subsidies for urban mass transit in the 1970s.
Automobile fuel efficiency is up over 50%. The number of people riding
public buses and trains is down, WAY down in many areas, which results
in a net increase in the fuel cost per rider mile AND a net increase in
the amount of pollution generated per rider mile.

A few facts. First, trains -- which probably have higher ridership per
mile than buses:
Amtrak has virtually no impact on reducing traffic congestion,
pollution, or energy use. Even a doubling of train ridership
would reduce energy consumption and traffic congestion by less
than 0.1 percent.

Amtrak is by far the most highly subsidized form of intercity
transportation. The average taxpayer subsidy per Amtrak rider is
$100, or 40 percent of the total per-passenger cost. On some of
the long-distance routes, such as New York to Los Angeles, the
taxpayer subsidy per passenger exceeds $1,000. It would be
cheaper for taxpayers to close down expensive lines and purchase
discount round-trip airfare for all the Amtrak riders.

A 1982 Congressional Budget Office study concluded that "even
with future improvements in Amtrak's operating efficiency, the
Northeast Corridor rail service will yield only limited energy
savings, while the rest of the system will yield an energy loss.
The [Amtrak] rail system as a whole will yield a net energy
loss." Since that time, Amtrak's fuel efficiency has improved
less than the improvement in automobile fuel efficiency.

If all Amtrak passengers switched to cars, U.S. energy
consumption would rise by only 0.1 percent.
(above from: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-266.html)

Think public buses are more cost-efficient than trains? Guess again.
Capital Metro is my city's mass transit bureaucracy. Our state
comptroller has routinely audited school districts, state agencies, and
local agencies to show taxpayers how their money is being spent and to
highlight areas where things should be changed. Here is the report on
Austin's Cap Metro:

The total operating cost connected with providing these services
was $70.3 million in fiscal 1998. In that year, Capital Metro
took in $7.9 million in fares from its various services, or a
little more than 10 percent of its costs.
http://www.window.state.tx.us/tpr/capmet/chpt5.htm

That means, you dole-scrounging ****, nearly 90% of the cost of riding
the bus was taken from taxpayers -- local and federal money -- who also
have to pay for their own cars, their own insurance, their own
maintenance, etc., just so slothful people like you can get around
without cars.

What about your claims about the environment?

Here are some data about different modes of transportation, how much
energy they consume per person per mile, and how much CO2 per rider per
mile they generate:

Mode | Btu/person/mile | Energy/person/mile | CO2/person/mile
Automobile (driver only) 5,815 0.046 gal 0.911
lbs Automobile (avg, 1.59 people) 3,635 0.029 gal
0.569 lbs Automobile (2 persons) 2,908
0.023 gal 0.451 lbs Automobile (3 persons)
1,938 0.015 gal 0.304 lbs Personal truck (driver only)
7,217 0.058 gal 1.131 lbs Personal truck (1.64
people) 4,511 0.036 gal 0.707 lbs Composite
(cars+lighttrucks) 6,375 0.051 gal 0.999 lbs
Motorcycles 2,494 0.020 gal
0.391 lbs Snowmobiles 10,423 0.083 gal
1.633 lbs http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid598.php


Mode | Btu/person/mile | Energy/person/mile | CO2/person/mile
Transit bus (diesel) 4,802 0.035 gal
0.775 lbs Transit rail (electric) 3,168 0.928 kWh
1.328 lbs Commuter rail (electric) 2,932 0.859
kWh 1.229 lbs Commuter rail (diesel) 2,932
0.021 gal 0.473 lbs
http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid599.php

Note that carpooling -- with just one passenger per car -- reduces the
level of emissions to a level 50% below that of taking a bus and would
produce only one-third the CO2 emissions of an electric commuter rail
per passenger mile. (Electric vehicles are *NOT* CO2-neutral. It takes
a lot of electric energy to repower a battery, and that energy is
usually produced by burning coal or through fission.)

Thus, Skanky, you're not only a leech on society but your form of
transportation puts at least the same burden on the environment as all
those people who get around faster because they don't have to make so
many bloody bus stops or make transfers to other buses to get closer to
where they want to go.

You're also totally ****ing wrong, as usual. Public transportation
takes money from everyone to subsidize the few who actually use it (the
phrase "take advantage of it" seems especially apropos given the fact
that public buses are subsidized at nearly 90%). And there's no
inherent environmental benefit to taking a bus -- they're usually empty
here anyway, but they still run around without riders and stay on
schedule in case someone ever decides to get on -- over a car.

> or just because you feel a
> car must be used in order for you to feel superior?

It has nothing to do with superiority, you stupid bitch, it has to do
with wasting time in traffic (a bus trip in Austin, on average, takes
two- to four- times longer than driving depending on time of day) and
draining the taxpayers for a bloated boondoggle that, like every other
government program, never delivers on any of its promises. Our bus
system has ruined our roads -- the same ones its revenues were supposed
to keep repaired, but we know its revenues are about 10% of its
operating expenses. If it's the same or similar in Toronto, just
remember your fare represents a tiny drop in the bucket for what it
actually costs to get your smelly, lazy, fat ass around. All those
people who get around more efficiently than you do in their cars are
paying for your reduced bus fare. But who can blame them for avoiding
taking the bus? They have lives, and you have all your idle time.
END RESTORE

Why did you lie about buses being better for the environment, Skanky?
Why do you see benefits to every thing you have to do because of your
sloth? You did it when you were on your tangents about exotic spices
and tropical fruits, but when given the choice between practicing what
you preach or continuing to harm animals and the planet, you chose not
to change. You've shown yourself to be a complete phony when it comes to
principles. You don't give a shit about the animals or the environment,
you just think that it's cool not to work hard enough to drive and that
you're actually achieving something by doing nothing. Loser.

Skanky wrote:

> Look

You're 40something and you don't have a car, you don't -- and WON'T
-- attempt to even live according to your own principles, smoke pot
every friggin' day, are an underachiever, etc. I don't look to people
like you for anything, much less correction.

Skanky wrote:

> > That's what happens to things that are marginal, they become
> > redundant, obsolete, useless. Just like you.
>
> You're fear of non-conformity is showing again.

I don't fear non-conformity as much and as readily as you embrace
irrelevance, obsolesence, and uselessness. Why would you waste your
time and what little money you earn with such a fruitless endeavor?

> > > These days I'm using ActiveWorlds as my 3d live chat and build
> > > program of choice. I don't know how to make avatars for it,
> >
> > You're too resistant to change to even learn. Figures.
>
> You are projecting.

You don't understand what projection is.

> I have no interest in making avatars right now.

You have no interest in making money, either, unless it involves "luck"
like winning a lottery. Everyone else your age has bought a home,
Skanky, because they've worked and saved. Why haven't you?

> If I did, I'd be doing it, just as I do with the many other things I
> make.

Rolling joints is hardly a wise use of time.

> > > but have made a
> > > lot of objects and textures.
> >
> > But no money. Imagine that.
>
> I get all the money I need from

Your parents. You're in your mid-40s and still dependent on them for
support.

> > From Wikipedia:
> > As a commercial platform, Active Worlds has not been notably
> > successful.
>
> It's been around since before 1996, when I first became a cit.

So you've been wasting your time with this commercially unsuccessful
crap for a whole decade?

LOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!

> Put into context of the *entire* wiki article,

it hasn't been commercially successful. Meanwhile, sites developed in
the last two or three years have become commercially successful.
Wink, wink. Heh.

> they are focusing on
> the very small side business

Hobby.

> some object creators have. Rather than
> try to squeeze pennies out of a hobby, I offer my stuff for free and
> am delighted when I visit someone's build and see that they are using
> my objects.

Others are proud to see people driving on bridges or roads they've
designed or built, eat food they've prepared, wear clothes they've
designed or sold, etc., but you're happy when other losers use your
crappy stuff in their silly cyber make-believe worlds.

> > > and send telegrams and other stuff.
> >
> > Same here. Why would you want to whisper or send phony telegrams in
> > a phony make-believe world, Skanky?
>
> the people I interact with there are just as real as the people
> YOU interact with on this newsgroup.

Answer the question. Why would you want to whisper or send phony
telegrams to other losers in your phony make-believe world, Skanky? And
what's so big about that?

Dime Bag Skanky wrote:

> I guess I have to reluctantly

You've shown no such reluctance.

> admit that I would probably do it for a
> couple million dollars.

You would "probably" do it for a hell of a lot less, like in the $10
range for a dime bag.

> Does that make us prostitutes? Heheh.

Yes, you were the first time you turned a trick.

cheeky-bo-beeky wrote:
> > What is it you think I earn?
>
> You're not earning much for asking people if they also want fries.

If you're going to make claims like that, back it up.

> > where did you get the idea that my income is low?
>
> From your cheapskate attitude about signing up to use another news
> server, from your fantasies about winning the lottery so you can retire
> on a five-acre farm with a pickup, from everything else you've written
> that demonstrates your slovenly approach to life.

Your reading comprehension needs some work. What I wrote (last year or
whenever it was) was that I would need to win a lottery to do it *now*.
There will be no problem doing this when I retire. As for slovenly,
what the **** are you talking about? Back up your accusations with
facts, or it just shows your here only to insult.

> > Not here, they don't drug test.
>
> Yes, they do. You lied again, Skanky.

Nope, just got it wrong, and fully retract what I said admit that I was
wrong. Bet we won't be seeing you be decent enough to do that. A
friend used to work for the TTC in the early 90s, and I was going by
what I knew from then.

> > [snip rant against public transportation]
>
> It wasn't a rant, it was a series of data that showed your claims about
> it were completely wrong. Why do you engage yourself in discussions and
> presume that your slacker ways of life are somehow more noble or more
> beneficial for things like the environment or the animals? Why do you
> continue to do things that cause harm or damage even after you've been
> shown to be wrong?

The TTC themselves are on my side about this. There are many signs on
subways, etc. talking about it being good for the environment, and it's
backed by organizations including Pollution Probe, etc.

Comrade Karen, bird-diddling authoritarian child-abandoner, wrote:

> Leif Erikson wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Comrade Karen, bird-diddling authoritarian child-abandoner,
> wrote:
>
> >> What we need to do is make public transit more attractive and
> >> encourage more people to ride it.
>
> > Why is it any of your or "society's" interest?
>
> Because some people, unlike you, are concerned about less
> fortunate people, people who have disabilities or other
> handicaps which make it difficult for them to drive themselves.
> That is what being a part of humanity and a genuinely moral
> person is about: helping others and making life better for
> the less fortunate, the hungry, the poor, the sick, the
> blind, the lame, widows, orphans, the poor ... you know,
> all the people Jesus talked about.

Separation of church and state. If YOU think providing others with
transportation is a good idea and "moral," then YOU pay for it
yourself. You have no right to make others pay for your religious
duties.

<...>
> > People are, and ought to be, responsible for their own costs of
> > transport. You don't have a "right" to transport from point A to
> > point B at anyone's expense but your own.
>
> But compassion and a concern for social justice

You pay for your sense of "social justice" and I'll pay for mine.

> and, for those of us
> who are Christians, Christ's words, oblige us to care for our
> neighbors who cannot care for themselves.

Separation of church and state. Why do you seek to coerce others to
fund what you perceive to be your religious obligations? And why do you
point to Christianity when it comes to funding your peculiar goals and
object when anyone points to it in the course of making laws? You're
showing yourself to be a duplicitous shitbag. As usual.

Gooey-bo-booey wrote:
> >>Nearly 3:00am, and there you are, stoned out of your
> >>****ing gourd and posting to usenet. That's a shit life.
>
> > What the **** Goo?
>
> You were up after 3:00am posting to usenet. Loser.

Cite a study that shows being up at 3:00am indicates that one is a
loser.

> > Are you actually accusing me of molesting kids????
>
> You and your filthy **** sister both did it.

Goo, you are the one who always introduces the topic of anally raping
young boys. It's obvious to all that you think about this a lot. It
makes me wonder if you actually do it, or maybe had it done to you.

pearl

> > >>>>While you're foaming at the mouth about everything, what's your
> > >>>>take on
> > >>>
> > >>>Guess.
> > >>
> > >>Tell us how all these UK-Muslim terror suspects
> > >
> > > Evening round-up of twilight zone manic spewing propaganda...
> >
> >
> > I know you and people like Alex Jones get your knickers in knots
> > and go apeshit over the slightest things.
>
> 'LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves

Thus, my point is established.

Karen Winter, "anglo catholic" bestiality practitioner, wrote:

> Leif Erikson wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> Karen Winter, "anglo catholic" bestiality practitioner,
> wrote:
>
> >>>> What we need to do is make public transit more attractive and
> >>>> encourage more people to ride it.
>
> >>> Why is it any of your or "society's" interest?
>
> >> Because some people, unlike you, are concerned about less
> >> fortunate people,
>
> > Then *you* pay for their private transportation.
>
> <snip>
>
> In some cases, I have --

Do it in every case and stop using the taxpayers as your church offering
plate, you ****ing authoritarian.

> or drove them to their appointments
> myself. That was one of the things I did regularly at
> St. Bede's until Derek pulled his little stunt.

It wasn't a little stunt, it was something he believed was the right
thing to do. Apparently your vicar agreed with him, too.

> Bede's Backers worked with old, sick, and poor adults

You and Sylvia? Talk about the blind leading the blind...

> of the congregation, not children, and members volunteered time
> and money to help those who needed practical help, like
> transportation to shopping and doctors' appointments,
> food and/or cooking, furniture, Habitat for Humanity
> volunteer work, and so on.
>
> But, of course, no one person, even the wealthiest, can
> help everyone who needs it, or even identify everyone
> who needs help. That is what the "safety net" in society
> is about: everyone joining in together to help as many
> of the less fortunate as possible.

No, you would simply tax people to fund what you perceive to be your
religious imperatives. You're an arrogant shitbag authoritarian who
doesn't appreciate separation of church and state.

> It is what society should be about.

No, society should be about people providing assistance to those around
them as they see fit, not being taxed because bird-****ing
anglo-catholics in Santa Fe think Jesus wants her to tax and spend as
she sees fit.

> Private groups do a lot, but there is
> need for public help as well.

Your church would have a lot more resources for your religious duties
if you'd stop creating the schism that's causing congregations to leave
and to spend money and time trying to decide what their next course of
action should be.

> <snip>
> >> and making life better for
> >> the less fortunate, the hungry, the poor, the sick, the
> >> blind, the lame, widows, orphans, the poor ... you know,
> >> all the people Jesus talked about.
>
> > Oh, goody. Did Jesus talk about helping birds?
>
> He said that not even a sparrow falls without God's
> attention and concern. I think He would be concerned
> for even a cockatiel.

Then you have something to be worried about.

> >> Decent people do care about other human beings, and non-human
> >> beings as well. You care about no one but yourself, and nothing
> >> but money.
>
> > False.
>
> *disbelieving laughter*

Why do you not believe that others are capable of helping others but
would do it on their own terms rather than being coerced by government?
Since when do Christians have a right to use the federal treasury as
their tithe box? If you think Jesus wants you to clothe and feed the
homeless, do it yourself. Don't rob taxpayers for your religious
beliefs, bitch.

"chico chupacabra" > wrote in message ...
> pearl
>
> > > >>>>While you're foaming at the mouth about everything, what's your
> > > >>>>take on
> > > >>>
> > > >>>Guess.
> > > >>
> > > >>Tell us how all these UK-Muslim terror suspects
> > > >
> > > > Evening round-up of twilight zone manic spewing propaganda...
> > >
> > >
> > > I know you and people like Alex Jones get your knickers in knots
> > > and go apeshit over the slightest things.
> >
> > 'LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves
>
> Thus, my point is established.

It's not the authors who are irrationally stirring things up, chumpo.

But you knew that.

Skanky wrote:

> > > What is it you think I earn?
> >
> > You're not earning much for asking people if they also want fries.
>
> If you're going

No, I didn't order fries. How well do you fit in with the kids working
at McDonald's?

> > > where did you get the idea that my income is low?
> >
> > From your cheapskate attitude about signing up to use another news
> > server, from your fantasies about winning the lottery so you can
> > retire on a five-acre farm with a pickup, from everything else
> > you've written that demonstrates your slovenly approach to life.
>
> Your reading comprehension

is far superior to yours.

> What I wrote (last year
> or whenever it was) was that I would need to win a lottery to do it
> *now*.

No, everything you've written about land ownership, wealth, etc.,
focused and STILL DOES on "luck."

> As for slovenly, what the **** are you talking about?

You.

> Back up your accusations with facts

Forty-six. Dead end job with marginal pay. Your boss is probably half
your age. Pothead. Bus rider. No car. Atmosphere, Active World. Too
cheap for a usenet account. Cankles.

> > > Not here, they don't drug test.
> >
> > Yes, they do. You lied again, Skanky.
>
> Nope

Yes, you said you wouldn't have to take a drug test to drive a bus and
it turns out you would. You lied.

> > > [snip rant against public transportation]
> >
> > It wasn't a rant, it was a series of data that showed your claims
> > about it were completely wrong. Why do you engage yourself in
> > discussions and presume that your slacker ways of life are somehow
> > more noble or more beneficial for things like the environment or
> > the animals? Why do you continue to do things that cause harm or
> > damage even after you've been shown to be wrong?
>
> The TTC themselves are on my side about this.

The facts, though, are against you and TTC.

> There are many signs on
> subways, etc.

None of which tell you the truth -- they just try to get you to ride
the bus more often so they call tell Ottawa they need more money
because their ridership is up, you gullible ****. They won't tell you:

RESTO
It is *not* environmentally friendly, at least not in the US. If
anything, it contributes to more pollution per capita than cars do
because of the scope of public transportation systems (the ever
increasing size of such systems and the hours they run) compared to the
ever decreasing ridership. It's a wasteful abuse of taxpayer funds AND
of fuel.

Much has changed since the "efficiency" and "environment" arguments
were made for increased subsidies for urban mass transit in the 1970s.
Automobile fuel efficiency is up over 50%. The number of people riding
public buses and trains is down, WAY down in many areas, which results
in a net increase in the fuel cost per rider mile AND a net increase in
the amount of pollution generated per rider mile.

A few facts. First, trains -- which probably have higher ridership per
mile than buses:
Amtrak has virtually no impact on reducing traffic congestion,
pollution, or energy use. Even a doubling of train ridership
would reduce energy consumption and traffic congestion by less
than 0.1 percent.

Amtrak is by far the most highly subsidized form of intercity
transportation. The average taxpayer subsidy per Amtrak rider is
$100, or 40 percent of the total per-passenger cost. On some of
the long-distance routes, such as New York to Los Angeles, the
taxpayer subsidy per passenger exceeds $1,000. It would be
cheaper for taxpayers to close down expensive lines and purchase
discount round-trip airfare for all the Amtrak riders.

A 1982 Congressional Budget Office study concluded that "even
with future improvements in Amtrak's operating efficiency, the
Northeast Corridor rail service will yield only limited energy
savings, while the rest of the system will yield an energy loss.
The [Amtrak] rail system as a whole will yield a net energy
loss." Since that time, Amtrak's fuel efficiency has improved
less than the improvement in automobile fuel efficiency.

If all Amtrak passengers switched to cars, U.S. energy
consumption would rise by only 0.1 percent.
(above from: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-266.html)

Think public buses are more cost-efficient than trains? Guess again.
Capital Metro is my city's mass transit bureaucracy. Our state
comptroller has routinely audited school districts, state agencies, and
local agencies to show taxpayers how their money is being spent and to
highlight areas where things should be changed. Here is the report on
Austin's Cap Metro:

The total operating cost connected with providing these services
was $70.3 million in fiscal 1998. In that year, Capital Metro
took in $7.9 million in fares from its various services, or a
little more than 10 percent of its costs.
http://www.window.state.tx.us/tpr/capmet/chpt5.htm

That means, you dole-scrounging ****, nearly 90% of the cost of riding
the bus was taken from taxpayers -- local and federal money -- who also
have to pay for their own cars, their own insurance, their own
maintenance, etc., just so slothful people like you can get around
without cars.

What about your claims about the environment?

Here are some data about different modes of transportation, how much
energy they consume per person per mile, and how much CO2 per rider per
mile they generate:

Mode | Btu/person/mile | Energy/person/mile | CO2/person/mile
Automobile (driver only) 5,815 0.046 gal 0.911
lbs Automobile (avg, 1.59 people) 3,635 0.029 gal
0.569 lbs Automobile (2 persons) 2,908
0.023 gal 0.451 lbs Automobile (3 persons)
1,938 0.015 gal 0.304 lbs Personal truck (driver only)
7,217 0.058 gal 1.131 lbs Personal truck (1.64
people) 4,511 0.036 gal 0.707 lbs Composite
(cars+lighttrucks) 6,375 0.051 gal 0.999 lbs
Motorcycles 2,494 0.020 gal
0.391 lbs Snowmobiles 10,423 0.083 gal
1.633 lbs http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid598.php


Mode | Btu/person/mile | Energy/person/mile | CO2/person/mile
Transit bus (diesel) 4,802 0.035 gal
0.775 lbs Transit rail (electric) 3,168 0.928 kWh
1.328 lbs Commuter rail (electric) 2,932 0.859
kWh 1.229 lbs Commuter rail (diesel) 2,932
0.021 gal 0.473 lbs
http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid599.php

Note that carpooling -- with just one passenger per car -- reduces the
level of emissions to a level 50% below that of taking a bus and would
produce only one-third the CO2 emissions of an electric commuter rail
per passenger mile. (Electric vehicles are *NOT* CO2-neutral. It takes
a lot of electric energy to repower a battery, and that energy is
usually produced by burning coal or through fission.)

Thus, Skanky, you're not only a leech on society but your form of
transportation puts at least the same burden on the environment as all
those people who get around faster because they don't have to make so
many bloody bus stops or make transfers to other buses to get closer to
where they want to go.

You're also totally ****ing wrong, as usual. Public transportation
takes money from everyone to subsidize the few who actually use it (the
phrase "take advantage of it" seems especially apropos given the fact
that public buses are subsidized at nearly 90%). And there's no
inherent environmental benefit to taking a bus -- they're usually empty
here anyway, but they still run around without riders and stay on
schedule in case someone ever decides to get on -- over a car.

> or just because you feel a
> car must be used in order for you to feel superior?

It has nothing to do with superiority, you stupid bitch, it has to do
with wasting time in traffic (a bus trip in Austin, on average, takes
two- to four- times longer than driving depending on time of day) and
draining the taxpayers for a bloated boondoggle that, like every other
government program, never delivers on any of its promises. Our bus
system has ruined our roads -- the same ones its revenues were supposed
to keep repaired, but we know its revenues are about 10% of its
operating expenses. If it's the same or similar in Toronto, just
remember your fare represents a tiny drop in the bucket for what it
actually costs to get your smelly, lazy, fat ass around. All those
people who get around more efficiently than you do in their cars are
paying for your reduced bus fare. But who can blame them for avoiding
taking the bus? They have lives, and you have all your idle time.
END RESTORE

Why did you lie about buses being better for the environment, Skanky?
Why do you see benefits to every thing you have to do because of your
sloth? You did it when you were on your tangents about exotic spices
and tropical fruits, but when given the choice between practicing what
you preach or continuing to harm animals and the planet, you chose not
to change. You've shown yourself to be a complete phony when it comes to
principles. You don't give a shit about the animals or the environment,
you just think that it's cool not to work hard enough to drive and that
you're actually achieving something by doing nothing. Loser.

Skanky wrote:

> > >>Nearly 3:00am, and there you are, stoned out of your
> > >>****ing gourd and posting to usenet. That's a shit life.
> >
> > > What the **** Goo?
> >
> > You were up after 3:00am posting to usenet. Loser.
>
> Cite a study

One doesn't need a study for that when the signs a
Forty-six. Dead end job with marginal pay. Your boss is probably half
your age. Pothead. Bus rider. No car. Atmosphere, Active World. Too
cheap for a usenet account. Cankles.

pearl wrote:

> > > > >>>>While you're foaming at the mouth about everything, what's
> > > > >>>>your take on
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>Guess.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Tell us how all these UK-Muslim terror suspects
> > > > >
> > > > > Evening round-up of twilight zone manic spewing propaganda...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I know you and people like Alex Jones get your knickers in knots
> > > > and go apeshit over the slightest things.
> > >
> > > 'LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves
> >
> > Thus, my point is established.
>
> It's not the authors who are irrationally stirring things up

Yes, they and the terrorists are very irrational. It's why you find
common ground with them.

"chico chupacabra" > wrote in message ...
> pearl wrote:
>
> > > > > >>>>While you're foaming at the mouth about everything, what's
> > > > > >>>>your take on
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>Guess.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Tell us how all these UK-Muslim terror suspects
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Evening round-up of twilight zone manic spewing propaganda...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I know you and people like Alex Jones get your knickers in knots
> > > > > and go apeshit over the slightest things.
> > > >
> > > > 'LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves
> > >
> > > Thus, my point is established.
> >
> > It's not the authors who are irrationally stirring things up
>
> Yes, they and the terrorists are very irrational. It's why you find
> common ground with them.

That's why you find common ground with the real terrorists.

pearl wrote:

> > > > > > >>>>While you're foaming at the mouth about everything,
> > > > > > >>>>what's your take on
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>Guess.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>Tell us how all these UK-Muslim terror suspects
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Evening round-up of twilight zone manic spewing
> > > > > > > propaganda...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know you and people like Alex Jones get your knickers in
> > > > > > knots and go apeshit over the slightest things.
> > > > >
> > > > > 'LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves
> > > >
> > > > Thus, my point is established.
> > >
> > > It's not the authors who are irrationally stirring things up
> >
> > Yes, they and the terrorists are very irrational. It's why you find
> > common ground with them.
>
> That's why you find common ground with

Those trying to put a stop to the following "Neo-Con Zionist pigs":
Abdula Ahmed Ali
Cossor Ali
Shazad Khuram Ali
Nabeel Hussain
Tanvir Hussain
Umair Hussain
Umar Islam
Waseem Kayani
Assan Abdullah Khan
Waheed Arafat Khan
Osman Adam Khatib
Abdul Muneem Patel
Tayib Rauf
Muhammed Usman Saddique
Assad Sarwar
Ibrahim Savant
Amin Asmin Tariq
Shamin Mohammed Uddin
Waheed Zaman

How are those Zionist pigs involved with Skull & Crossbones, the
Bildeburgers, the CFR, Ronald McDonald House, and the Harper Valley
PTA? Connect the ****ing dots, Les-Ali.

"chico chupacabra" > wrote in message ...
> pearl wrote:
>
> > > > > > > >>>>While you're foaming at the mouth about everything,
> > > > > > > >>>>what's your take on
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>Guess.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>Tell us how all these UK-Muslim terror suspects
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Evening round-up of twilight zone manic spewing
> > > > > > > > propaganda...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I know you and people like Alex Jones get your knickers in
> > > > > > > knots and go apeshit over the slightest things.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 'LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves
> > > > >
> > > > > Thus, my point is established.
> > > >
> > > > It's not the authors who are irrationally stirring things up
> > >
> > > Yes, they and the terrorists are very irrational. It's why you find
> > > common ground with them.
> >
> > That's why you find common ground with the real terrorists.
>
> Those trying to put a stop to the following "Neo-Con Zionist pigs":

'IDF Causes Serious Head Injury to Israeli Lawyer
Saturday, 12 August 2006, 8:57 am
Press Release: International Solidarity Movement

Israeli Army Cause Serious Head Injury to Israeli Lawyer at Demonstration

Earlier today, August 11, the Israeli Army and Border Police shot an Israeli
demonstrator with rubber bullets from close range in the head and neck,
causing serious injuries. The man, who is a lawyer, was taken by the army to
Tel Hasomer hospital from where he is reported to have suffered brain damage.

In total 9 people were shot with rubber bullets in a non-violent demonstration
in Bil'in. Those shot included 2 villagers of Bil'in as well as citizens of
Denmark, France, USA, Japan and Israel. Other people from United Kingdom,
Sweden, Denmark were beaten, struck with rifle butt or injured by sound
grenade fragments.

About 200 demonstrators joined the peaceful march from the Bil'in mosque to
the Apartheid Wall about 1 km away. The purpose of the march was to
demonstrate against the 'New Style of Killing' where even children are targetted
by Israeli military forces. The marchers carried 5 mock bodies symbolising an
entire family killed by Israeli military action.

Before the marchers were able to leave the village soldiers blocked their route,
announced the demonstration illegal and then immediately fired sound grenades
and rubber bullets from close range. The solders' commander claimed the
demonstration was illegal although an Israeli court has previously confirmed
the right of Bil'in villagers to hold demonstrations.

http://www.palsolidarity.org/main

No.

"The police were neither brutal nor vicious (enough), depite the illegitimacy
of the "protest." "- 'usual suspect, anti-war protesters Mar 22 2003

Is the above what you had in mind, you Neo-Con Zionist fascist?


This ain't going away, traitor:

'The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than
a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield
strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still
support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.'
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...agar-0112.html

Nu kvar?

lesley the foot-massage whore of Cork, Ireland lied:

> "Leif Erikson" wrote:
>
>
>>>>deaths. You also lied about not ****ing that kid next
>>>>door up the ass with a broom handle.
>
>
> "Pedophiles

Skanky broom raped that boy.

pearl wrote:

> "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message .net...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Answer the questions
>>>
>>>>It absolutely is necessary that I try to discredit this poster now.
>>>
>>>Treasonous mass murder supporting coward.
>>
>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew planes into the WTC were
>>the mass murderers,
>
>
> The 9/11 terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC are certainly
> mass murderers

Right - end of story.


> 'Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!
>
> [snip tabloid bullshit]

Another item for the lesley crackpot beliefs list...

Karen Winter, statist schismatic bird-diddling cat
shampooer ****ing away time in the trailer park on
Calle Mejia, wrote:

> Leif Erikson wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Karen Winter, statist schismatic bird-diddling cat shampooer ****ing away time in the trailer park on Calle Mejia, wrote:
>>
>>>>> What we need to do is make public transit more attractive and
>>>>> encourage
>>>>> more people to ride it.
>
>
>>>> Why is it any of your or "society's" interest?
>
>
>>> Because some people, unlike you, are concerned about less
>>> fortunate people,
>
>
>> Then *you* pay for their private transportation.
>
>
> <snip>
>
> In some cases, I have -- or drove them to their appointments
> myself.

Then "public" transportation isn't needed, after all.


> That was one of the things I did regularly at
> St. Bede's until Derek pulled his little stunt.

You and that piece of human flotsam you call a "life
partner" were menaces to children. Derek did the right
thing. I don't know that you'll be welcome at Holy
Faith Episcopal church much longer, either.


> Bede's Backers worked with old, sick, and poor adults of the
> congregation, not children, and members volunteered time
> and money to help those who needed practical help, like
> transportation to shopping and doctors' appointments,
> food and/or cooking, furniture, Habitat for Humanity
> volunteer work, and so on.
>
> But, of course, no one person, even the wealthiest, can
> help everyone who needs it, or even identify everyone
> who needs help.

No one person has to do it. Volunteers always step up.


> That is what the "safety net" in society
> is about: everyone joining in together to help as many
> of the less fortunate as possible. It is what society
> should be about.

"There is no such thing as society."
-- Margaret Thatcher - 31 Oct 1987

Lady Thatcher is correct.


>
>>> and making life better for
>>> the less fortunate, the hungry, the poor, the sick, the
>>> blind, the lame, widows, orphans, the poor ... you know,
>>> all the people Jesus talked about.
>
>
>> Oh, goody. Did Jesus talk about helping birds?
>
>
> He said that not even a sparrow falls without God's
> attention and concern. I think He would be concerned
> for even a cockatiel.

He would not have advocated your diddling birds.


>
>>> Decent people do care about other human beings, and non-human
>>> beings as well. You care about no one but yourself, and nothing
>>> but money.
>
>
>> False.
>
>
> [snip hag's cackle]

It is false. I care about lots of people.

Skanky the loser pothead blabbered:

> Leif Erikson set the record straight:
>
>>>>Nearly 3:00am, and there you are, stoned out of your
>>>>****ing gourd and posting to usenet. That's a shit life.
>>
>>>What the **** Leif?
>>
>>You were up after 3:00am posting to usenet. Loser.
>
>
> Cite

Loser.


>>>Are you actually accusing me of molesting kids????
>>
>>You and your filthy **** sister both did it.
>
>
> Leif, you are the one who always introduces the topic of anally raping
> young boys.

I'm condemning your participation in it.

"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
> pearl wrote:
>
> > "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message .net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>Answer the questions
> >>>
> >>>>It absolutely is necessary that I try to discredit this poster now.
> >>>
> >>>Treasonous mass murder supporting coward.
> >>
> >>The 9/11 terrorists who flew planes into the WTC were
> >>the mass murderers,
> >
> >
> > The 9/11 terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC are certainly
> > mass murderers
>
> Right - end of story.
>
>
> > 'Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!
> >
> > [snip
>
> Another item

'Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks
on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well. The identities
of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are
now in doubt.

Saudi Arabian pilot Waleed Al Shehri was one of five men that the FBI
said had deliberately crashed American Airlines flight 11 into the World
Trade Centre on 11 September.

His photograph was released, and has since appeared in newspapers and
on television around the world. Now he is protesting his innocence from
Casablanca, Morocco.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/1559151.stm

'Suicide hijacker' is an airline pilot alive and well in Jeddah
A man named by the US Department of Justice as a suicide hijacker of
American Airlines flight 11 * the first airliner to smash into the World
Trade Centre * is very much alive and living in Jeddah. Abdulrahman
al-Omari, a pilot with Saudi Airlines, was astonished to find himself accused
of hijacking * as well as being dead * and has visited the US consulate in
Jeddah to demand an explanation.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...sp?story=94438

.....

http://www.newsgateway.ca/hijackers_still_alive.htm

pearl wrote:

> "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message .net...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Answer the questions
>>>>>
>>>>>>It absolutely is necessary that I try to discredit this poster now.
>>>>>
>>>>>Treasonous mass murder supporting coward.
>>>>
>>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew planes into the WTC were
>>>>the mass murderers,
>>>
>>>
>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC are certainly
>>>mass murderers
>>
>>Right - end of story.
>>
>>
>>
>>>'Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!
>>>
>>>[snip
>>
>>Another item
>
>
> 'Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
>
> [snip *UNSUBSTANTIATED* tabloid bullshit]

It's on the list, lesley - no need to flaunt your
lunacy again.

"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
> pearl wrote:
>
> > "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>pearl wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message .net...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Answer the questions
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>It absolutely is necessary that I try to discredit this poster now.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Treasonous mass murder supporting coward.
> >>>>
> >>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew planes into the WTC were
> >>>>the mass murderers,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC are certainly
> >>>mass murderers
> >>
> >>Right - end of story.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>'Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!
> >>>
> >>>[snip
> >>
> >>Another item
> >
> >
> > 'Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
> >
> > [snip *UNSUBSTANTIATED*

Those guys are ALIVE, you idiot. LOL!

pearl wrote:
> "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
>
>>pearl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message .net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Answer the questions
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It absolutely is necessary that I try to discredit this poster now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Treasonous mass murder supporting coward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew planes into the WTC were
>>>>>>the mass murderers,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC are certainly
>>>>>mass murderers
>>>>
>>>>Right - end of story.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>'Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!
>>>>>
>>>>>[snip
>>>>
>>>>Another item
>>>
>>>
>>>'Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
>>>
>>>[snip *UNSUBSTANTIATED*
>
>
> Those guys are ALIVE, you idiot. LOL!

They aren't, LIESley. That bullshit is typical tabloid
crapola read and believed by the superstitious,
unthinking underclass. It's a case of different people
with the same name.

"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
> pearl wrote:
> > "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
> >
> >>pearl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>pearl wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>pearl wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message .net...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>Answer the questions
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>It absolutely is necessary that I try to discredit this poster now.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Treasonous mass murder supporting coward.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew planes into the WTC were
> >>>>>>the mass murderers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC are certainly
> >>>>>mass murderers
> >>>>
> >>>>Right - end of story.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>'Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>[snip
> >>>>
> >>>>Another item
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>'Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
> >>>
> >>>[snip *UNSUBSTANTIATED*
> >
> >
> > Those guys are ALIVE, you idiot. LOL!
>
> They aren't,

They are.

cheeky chucklebutt evaded my requests for proof and wrote:
> No, everything you've written about land ownership, wealth, etc.,
> focused and STILL DOES on "luck."

No. I've already explained under which conditions luck would be needed
(moving rural now), and which would not need luck (moving rural when
retired). What part of that are you too brain-dead to understand?

> > Back up your accusations with facts
>
> Forty-six. Dead end job with marginal pay. Your boss is probably half
> your age. Pothead. Bus rider. No car. Atmosphere, Active World. Too
> cheap for a usenet account. Cankles.

43. Can you acknowledge that you either are wrong or are lying? I
don't think you're man enough to. I have a good job. My boss's age
being 'probably' is not a fact. You don't know the frequency that I
smoke pot. Bus rider is not an insult, but I know that you intend it
as one. You don't know whether I currently have a car. Computer
programs I like are not the insult you intend. You know full well,
since I mentioned it many times, that I won't use my credit cards
online for usenet. 'Cankles' is an incorrect word when referencing the
forward and back button pictures on Dusty's page - you have been
informed that what you saw were bunched up socks. Are you man enough
to retract your lies/errors?

> > > > Not here, they don't drug test.
> > >
> > > Yes, they do. You lied again, Skanky.
> >
> > Nope
>
> Yes, you said you wouldn't have to take a drug test to drive a bus and
> it turns out you would. You lied.

I was wrong, using out-of-date facts, and fully admitted this. Do you
have the gonads to do the same about your statements above?

> > The TTC themselves are on my side about this.
>
> The facts, though, are against you and TTC.
>
> > There are many signs on
> > subways, etc.
>
> None of which tell you the truth -- they just try to get you to ride
> the bus more often so they call tell Ottawa they need more money
> because their ridership is up, you gullible ****. They won't tell you:

So, are you saying that Pollution Probe is lying too?

Scented Nectar
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/

Lesley the credulous self-marginalized foot-rubbing
whore of Cork, Ireland lied:

> "Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
>
>>Lesley the credulous self-marginalized foot-rubbing whore of Cork, Ireland lied:
>>
>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Lesley the credulous self-marginalized foot-rubbing whore of Cork, Ireland lied:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message ink.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Lesley the credulous self-marginalized foot-rubbing whore of Cork, Ireland lied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message nk.net...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>pearl wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Leif Erikson" > wrote in message .net...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Answer the questions
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>It absolutely is necessary that I try to discredit this poster now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Treasonous mass murder supporting coward.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew planes into the WTC were
>>>>>>>>the mass murderers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The 9/11 terrorists who flew the planes into the WTC are certainly
>>>>>>>mass murderers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Right - end of story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>'Seven of the WTC Hijackers found alive!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[snip
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Another item
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>'Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
>>>>>
>>>>>[snip *UNSUBSTANTIATED*
>>>
>>>
>>>Those guys are ALIVE, you idiot. LOL!
>>
>>They aren't,
>
>
> They are.

They aren't. The hijackers all perished.

You ****ing moron.

Goo the Inept wrote:
> >>>>Nearly 3:00am, and there you are, stoned out of your
> >>>>****ing gourd and posting to usenet. That's a shit life.
> >>
> >>>What the **** Goo?
> >>
> >>You were up after 3:00am posting to usenet. Loser.

Why do you think being up at 3 is indicative of loserness. Are you
scared of non-conformity like Cheeko is?

> >>>Are you actually accusing me of molesting kids????
> >>
> >>You and your filthy **** sister both did it.
> >
> >
> > Leif, you are the one who always introduces the topic of anally raping
> > young boys.
>
> I'm condemning your participation in it.

What participation? Elaborate. If you are going to make wild claims
like that, get ready to back it up with facts. Do you have the balls
to do that, Goo? Or are you inept in your attempts to discredit?

Scented Nectar
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/

cheeky upchuck wrote:
> I don't look to people
> like you for anything, much less correction.

You will when the info being corrected is about me.

Scented Nectar
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/

cheeky upchuck wrote:
> It won't take you long, not only because of the lack of substance but
> because of the lack of style. For an "art" site, it sure has a dearth of
> it. Not to mention amateurish HTML.

Let's see YOUR webpages. Seriously. Prove your superior creativity.
I promise that we will all be suitably impressed if we're not laughing
too hard.

Skanky the loser pothead blabbered:

> Leif Erikson set the record straight:
>
>>>>>>Nearly 3:00am, and there you are, stoned out of your
>>>>>>****ing gourd and posting to usenet. That's a shit life.
>>>>
>>>>>What the **** Leif?
>>>>
>>>>You were up after 3:00am posting to usenet. Loser.
>
>
> Why do you think being up at 3 is indicative of loserness.

Productive responsible people are asleep at that time
unless their societally important jobs require them to
be awake. You lead a societally marginal existence;
you were up at 3:00am posting to usenet because you're
a pothead loser.


>>>>>Are you actually accusing me of molesting kids????
>>>>
>>>>You and your filthy **** sister both did it.
>>>
>>>
>>>Leif, you are the one who always introduces the topic of anally raping
>>>young boys.
>>
>>I'm condemning your participation in it.
>
>
> What participation?

Your RAPE of the kid living next door.

Skanky the self-marginalized pothead loser child rapist
blabbered:

> chico chupacabra wrote:
>
>>It won't take you long, not only because of the lack of substance but
>>because of the lack of style. For an "art" site, it sure has a dearth of
>>it. Not to mention amateurish HTML.
>
>
> Let's see YOUR webpages. Seriously. Prove your superior creativity.

He didn't claim any, you loser pothead marginal
hosebag. Your web page is amateurish shit. So is
lesley's.

cheeso chucklebutt wrote:
> > I have no interest in making avatars right now.
>
> Everyone else your age has bought a home,

I have decided not to buy a home until I retire. I am happy with my
decision. Why aren't you? Because it scares you too much to consider
anything that nonconforms to the societal average, that's why. I
probably have a much happier life than you, because I do what is best
for me, instead of worrying about what the current norm is.

> Your parents. You're in your mid-40s and still dependent on them for
> support.

Prove this claim. Either that, or admit you are a repeat liar.

> > It's been around since before 1996, when I first became a cit.
>
> So you've been wasting your time with this commercially unsuccessful
> crap for a whole decade?

If it's so unsuccessful, how have they lasted so long? How
commercially successful is posting to usenet for you?

> Answer the question. Why would you want to whisper or send phony
> telegrams to other losers in your phony make-believe world, Skanky? And
> what's so big about that?

Answer this question. Why would you want to send email or send phony
postings to newsgroups in your phony make-believe internet? And what's
so big about that? Do you see the irony here?

Goo wrote:
> Productive responsible people are asleep at that time
> unless their societally important jobs require them to
> be awake. You lead a societally marginal existence;
> you were up at 3:00am posting to usenet because you're
> a pothead loser.

You certainly lead a restrictive life if you believe that.

> >>>>>Are you actually accusing me of molesting kids????
> >>>>
> >>>>You and your filthy **** sister both did it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Goo, you are the one who always introduces the topic of anally raping
> >>>young boys.
> >>
> >>I'm condemning your participation in it.
> >
> >
> > What participation?
>
> Your RAPE of the kid living next door.

I've never raped anyone. The way you're ranting makes me wonder if you
were abused as a boy. Were you?

Scented Nectar
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/

Skanky the 43-year-old self-marginalized scut-working
loser pothead blabbered:

> chico chupacabra wrote:
>
>>>I have no interest in making avatars right now.
>>
>>Everyone else your age has bought a home,
>
>
> I have decided

Ha ha ha ha ha! You mean reality decided it for you:
the reality of being a low-wage, scut-work,
self-marginalized pot-abusing wastrel.


> not to buy a home until I retire. I am happy with my
> decision.

You didn't make any decision. The reality is, you
couldn't possibly buy a house even if you wanted to.
You do scut work at a low wage, and you simply can't
afford a house. In fact, I'm quite certain you are
living in subsidized rental housing as it is,
subsidized by the state, your parents, or both.


>>Your parents. You're in your mid-40s and still dependent on them for
>>support.
>
>
> Prove this claim.

It is a fact. Since you're not ashamed to sponge off
them, why are you ashamed to admit that you sponge off
them?