Re: To Bob Badour, sorry

From: Cimode <>
Date: 17 Jun 2006 02:59:44 -0700
Message-ID: <>

Keith H Duggar wrote:
> Tony D wrote:
> > Cimode wrote:
> > > *saving us*? He is no fucking Christ!!! I don't know
> > > why some people have this obssessional need to be
> > > saved!!
> >
> > Where did you get "obsessional" from in what Gene wrote?
> > Maybe you should spend more time concentrating on the text
> > rather than trying to read between the lines?
Gene and few idiots around have not been diggesting the fact that I point out the hypocrisy of some people on this group pretending to promote exchange of ideas while in fact they keep sterilizing the debate by refusing to adress issued that contradict their point, pretending to be *saved by BB* while I observed he lack too much fundamental knowledge in mathematics and RM to keep a coherent thinking...I adressed simple issues with sound arguments that demonstrated his incoherent thinking...But

Just read the thread's comments and some of the terinology used by some people and I you will understand...Of course if you don't bother, you will merely by a believer...

It's not about reading between the lines it's about warning people about infatuation which can drive your judgment, instead of reasonning.

> I think it (Commode) was thinking of the "confessional" that
> it visits regularly.
I do not visit confessionals
For you knowledge, I am purely agnostic and I don't give a damn about your judeo christian heritage (I respect it though)...I compared the feeble mind of some people who qualify things easily without observation or anything logical...People who have a hypocritical attitude toward others...Claiming they are here to help when in fact they just expect obedience from the people who argue with them...That kills debate...

And from what I can see, BB has trained you well...

> > > If you want to save yourself, open a book read and do
> > > your best to understand... ...You talk about him as a
> > > sect guru leader..
> > >
> >
> > Never having been in a sect, I'll bow to your presumably
> > better experience and knowledge of such things.
> Exactly. Now you understand his knowledge of "confessional".
> > I think your spleen got the better of you there, because
> > that paragraph just degenerated into gibberish to me. Not
> > that it had much degeneration to do, mind.
> The truly bizarre thing is that Commode appeared only a few
> days before Dawn ran off to cry. Makes one wonder... Perhaps
> a cosmic balance is being maintained. Crank conservation.
A new dellusion...I did not know about *Dawn* until reading your post...

To find out the intention of your post I have read about Dawn...She obviously lacks fundamental knowledge and understanding of RM issues...BB and some people are even worse because they pretend to be better but when you dig into their argument, you find out they totally lack coherence and confuse SQL and RM concepts...When confronted to sound proofs they either run away or insult you...Typical of a barbarian attitude..How can something barbarian be knowldegeable?

> By the way, has anyone noticed that cranks frequently
> respond to their own posts multiple times?
The fact that I respond to posts is because I do not master (yet) all subtleties in NG exchange...You conclusion about *crank* (a new word added to my buzz prepackages thinking list...thanks)...Buy a disctionnary and widen you vocabulary spectrum to put prepackaged words on situations...A *prepackaged contemptous thinktank* is what describes best BB and his dogs...
> -- Keith --
Received on Sat Jun 17 2006 - 11:59:44 CEST

Original text of this message