Who wants the fascist Krygowski to speak for cyclists?

On Aug 29, 2:14*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
Under the headline "Who wants the fascist André Jute to speak at all?"
Tom Sherman °_° wrote:

On 8/29/2010 1:29 PM, André Jute wrote:

[...]

crickets

The little scumball Tom Sherman is trying to shut me up altogether:
"Who wants the fascist André Jute to speak at all?" Not that it
matters to braindead name-callers like Liddell Tommi, but I can prove
Krygowski has fascist tendencies, while Liddell Tommi can prove no
fascist tendencies about me at all. In fact, Liddell Tommi knows so
little about fascism, he thought Mussolini was the Fuhrer of the Third
Reich, until I straightened him out. That favour is the source of
Liddell Tommi's present resentment. (Never do a petty jerkoff a favour
-- he won't thank you for it.)

I merely want to stop the fascist Krygowski pretending to speak for
all cyclists: "Who wants the fascist Krygowski to speak for cyclists?"
My headline makes clear that I'm not prescribing for anyone else;
those who want Krygowski are free to choose him. They'll only get to
choose once, but that's the way it works with the Thousand Year Reichs
of fascists and commos and mullahs, all of them antidemocratic
totalitarians.

What Liddell Tommi is is too nasty to describe in a family conference.

Andre Jute
A real liberal, not a closet control freak

Yeah, I don't want you to shut up as Tom does. I want you to continue
writing. You provide lots of entertainment for the group. Your
cathartic rants, while you stump your little feet under the table are
utterly amusing. On rare occasions, as if by accident, you may post an
intelligent comment or question. However, in general, you provide lots
of comedy for the rest of us in which, for some masochistic reason,
you make yourself the target of your own jokes.

Unlike Tom, I would like t thank you for all the amusement.

And by "things", Bill means "things Fox News told me".

"CROWD ATTENDING BECK RALLY ESTIMATED AT OVER 500,000" -- Fox News

rms

"Chalo" wrote in message
...
Bill Sornson wrote:

Like a lot of things these days, because the elites say so.

To break down the jargon a bit for anyone who would like to follow
what Bill is saying:

By "elites", Bill means "people who disagree with me, but
coincidentally are much smarter than me and everybody else who shares
my opinions".

And by "things", Bill means "things Fox News told me".

By "elites" Mr. Sornson means the same thing as everyone else in the country
means - over educated *******s and academic know-nothings who do not have a
clue about anything - period!

Thank God for Fox News. Only the brainwashed ignorant follow the rest of the
media like lambs to the slaughter. Keith Olbermann and the rest of that
****ed-up crew at MSNBC anyone?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On Aug 29, 9:18*pm, Chalo wrote:
Bill Sornson wrote:

Like a lot of things these days, because the elites say so.

To break down the jargon a bit for anyone who would like to follow
what Bill is saying:

By "elites", Bill means "people who disagree with me, but
coincidentally are much smarter than me and everybody else who shares
my opinions".

And by "things", Bill means "things Fox News told me".

Chalo

I always assume the elites are on my side. After all, the likelihood
is that I, or people very much like me, told them what to eat, drink,
wear, drive, smoke, desire, hate and think. When there is a small
difference of opinion, as there has successively been on the ozone
layer, global freezing and global warming, they always adopt my view
after a short interregnum. They're not called elites for being stupid,
you know, and smart people rarely differ from me for long.

Andre Jute
Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live -- Mark Twain

On Aug 29, 9:29*pm, Tom Sherman °_°
wrote:
On 8/29/2010 3:19 PM, André Jute wrote:



On Aug 29, 8:51 pm, Tom Sherman °_°
*wrote:
On 8/29/2010 2:42 PM, Michael Press wrote: *In ,
* *Tom Sherman * *wrote:

On 8/29/2010 1:29 PM, André Jute wrote:
[...]

crickets

A word to the wise. Do not put text i[n] quotation marks
that the quoted person did not write.

Michael Press is surprisingly unaware of the standard convention of
brackets indicating and editorial insertion or deletion. *Therefore,
there is nothing dishonest or misleading in what I did.

You're an ignorant clown, Liddell Tommi. Here is the standard
convention among educated and civilized writers and other workers in
publishing: Angle brackets, like this * *are the same as quotation
marks, just as Michael says. Half-round brackets like this ( ) are
used for thoughts in parenthesis by the author himself. Square
brackets like this [ ] are used for matter inserted by an editor,
normally understood to be explicatory. What you're doing, Liddell
Tommi, is to lie, in quotes, about what I wrote. You're a cheat and a
liar, Tom Sherman, and now you're lying about your first lie.

Oh nonsense.

First of all, where I wrote "crickets was not proceeded by a "",
indicating it was new text by me, and not quoted text as any but the
newest n00b to Usenet knows. Secondly, on Usenet, putting something in
angle brackets indicates it is either a URL or a representation of a
non-written effect (as was the case here).

However, I do enjoy Mr. Jute making himself look silly.

The linguistic and moral crim has confessed. QED. Case closed. -- AJ

On 8/29/2010 4:14 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Aug 29, 9:29 pm, Tom Sherman °_°
wrote:
On 8/29/2010 3:19 PM, André Jute wrote:



On Aug 29, 8:51 pm, Tom Sherman °_°
wrote:
On 8/29/2010 2:42 PM, Michael Press wrote: In ,
Tom Sherman wrote:

On 8/29/2010 1:29 PM, André Jute wrote:
[...]

crickets

A word to the wise. Do not put text i[n] quotation marks
that the quoted person did not write.

Michael Press is surprisingly unaware of the standard convention of
brackets indicating and editorial insertion or deletion. Therefore,
there is nothing dishonest or misleading in what I did.

You're an ignorant clown, Liddell Tommi. Here is the standard
convention among educated and civilized writers and other workers in
publishing: Angle brackets, like this are the same as quotation
marks, just as Michael says. Half-round brackets like this ( ) are
used for thoughts in parenthesis by the author himself. Square
brackets like this [ ] are used for matter inserted by an editor,
normally understood to be explicatory. What you're doing, Liddell
Tommi, is to lie, in quotes, about what I wrote. You're a cheat and a
liar, Tom Sherman, and now you're lying about your first lie.

Oh nonsense.

First of all, where I wrote "crickets was not proceeded by a "",
indicating it was new text by me, and not quoted text as any but the
newest n00b to Usenet knows. Secondly, on Usenet, putting something in
angle brackets indicates it is either a URL or a representation of a
non-written effect (as was the case here).

However, I do enjoy Mr. Jute making himself look silly.

The linguistic and moral crim has confessed. QED. Case closed. -- AJ

Stating a lie as truth does not make it so, even when done by Mr.
Jute/McCoy.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Someone speaking *against* a private sector-public sector collusion to
control people's behavior (e.g., mandatory helmet laws) like Frank does
would be anti-fascist.

Unfortunately Jute, being less than acute about such matters, doesn't
know this. What a maroon.

--
That'll put marzipan in your pie plate, Bingo.

On Aug 29, 9:30*pm, Tom Sherman °_°
wrote:
On 8/29/2010 3:14 PM, André Jute wrote:





Under the headline "Who wants the fascist André Jute to speak at all?"
Tom Sherman *wrote:
On 8/29/2010 1:29 PM, André Jute wrote:

[...]

crickets

The little scumball Tom Sherman is trying to shut me up altogether:
"Who wants the fascist André Jute to speak at all?" Not that it
matters to braindead name-callers like Liddell Tommi, but I can prove
Krygowski has fascist tendencies, while Liddell Tommi can prove no
fascist tendencies about me at all. In fact, Liddell Tommi knows so
little about fascism, he thought Mussolini was the Fuhrer of the Third
Reich, until I straightened him out. That favour is the source of
Liddell Tommi's present resentment. (Never do a petty jerkoff a favour
-- he won't thank you for it.)

Mr. Jute continues to lie on this matter.

Prove it, Liddell Tommi.

I merely want to stop the fascist Krygowski pretending to speak for
all cyclists: "Who wants the fascist Krygowski to speak for cyclists?"
My headline makes clear that I'm not prescribing for anyone else;
those who want Krygowski are free to choose him. They'll only get to
choose once, but that's the way it works with the Thousand Year Reichs
of fascists and commos and mullahs, all of them antidemocratic
totalitarians.

What Liddell Tommi is is too nasty to describe in a family conference.

Andre Jute
A real liberal, not a closet control freak

Oh pish posh.

Liddell Tommi stands accused of favouring totalitarians, fascists,
communists and fundie terrorist mullahs, and of trying
unconstitutionally to interfere with my free speech, and the best he
can come up with in self-defense is "Oh, pish posh."

Even Andres Muro, who runs with the same gang of street corner thugs
as Liddell Tommi, agrees I'm right about Liddell Tommi's anti-
constitutional intentions: "I don't want you to shut up as Tom
does. ... Unlike Tom, I would like t thank you for all the amusement."

QED. Tom Sherman is an enemy of free speech. That makes him ipso facto
an enemy of democracy and an enemy of civil society.

Case closed.

Andre Jute
The Magisterium has arrived

On Aug 29, 3:13*pm, Andre Jute wrote:
On Aug 29, 9:18*pm, Chalo wrote:

Bill Sornson wrote:

Like a lot of things these days, because the elites say so.

To break down the jargon a bit for anyone who would like to follow
what Bill is saying:

By "elites", Bill means "people who disagree with me, but
coincidentally are much smarter than me and everybody else who shares
my opinions".

And by "things", Bill means "things Fox News told me".

Chalo

I always assume the elites are on my side. After all, the likelihood
is that I, or people very much like me, told them what to eat, drink,
wear, drive, smoke, desire, hate and think. When there is a small
difference of opinion, as there has successively been on the ozone
layer, global freezing and global warming, they always adopt my view
after a short interregnum. They're not called elites for being stupid,
you know, and smart people rarely differ from me for long.

Andre the Giant wrote, among other things, ...."and smart people
rarely differ from me for long".
I know, they prefer to ignore you. After all, its not worth it to
argue with an ass.

On Aug 29, 10:50*pm, " wrote:
On Aug 29, 3:13*pm, Andre Jute wrote:



On Aug 29, 9:18*pm, Chalo wrote:

Bill Sornson wrote:

Like a lot of things these days, because the elites say so.

To break down the jargon a bit for anyone who would like to follow
what Bill is saying:

By "elites", Bill means "people who disagree with me, but
coincidentally are much smarter than me and everybody else who shares
my opinions".

And by "things", Bill means "things Fox News told me".

Chalo

I always assume the elites are on my side. After all, the likelihood
is that I, or people very much like me, told them what to eat, drink,
wear, drive, smoke, desire, hate and think. When there is a small
difference of opinion, as there has successively been on the ozone
layer, global freezing and global warming, they always adopt my view
after a short interregnum. They're not called elites for being stupid,
you know, and smart people rarely differ from me for long.

Andre the Giant wrote, among other things, ...."and smart people
rarely differ from me for long".
I know, they prefer to ignore you. After all, its not worth it to
argue with an ass.

You should read what you write before you send it, Muro. As your text
stands, you're admitting to being one of the benighted fools who argue
with me because they know no better. -- Andre Jute