 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / March 2007Two a.sholes are heckling the "Your Right to Drive" thread.
Look at what these TWO a.sholes going by the names k_fl... (who use to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" thread. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.law-enforcement/browse_frm/thread/606883071a4 db2f6/0141590eaff608fc#0141590eaff608fc They had absolutely no intention of debating the issue, yet they felt compelled to clutter the thread with their lies and personal attacks to such a degree that it is difficult to even find the issue. Anyone just browsing through it would see a stream of posts coming from these disruptive lying sleaze balls and probably not take the trouble to follow it through to where the issue is discussed. In less than an hour, these TWO a.sholes cluttered the thread with more than 30 posts, back and forth with each other, with the deliberate intention of so cluttering the thread that few people would attempt to wade through their sh.t to get to the issue. They have not even pretended to address even one of the points I have made, yet they most loudly and offensively declared themselves the victors. They are LYING a.sholes. Larry is a LYING a.shole. K_Flynn is a LYING a.shole They always have been, and they always will be LYING a.sholes. > Look at what these TWO a.sholes going by the names k_fl... (who use to > go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > They always have been, and they always will be LYING a.sholes. Perhaps this is because we've already been over the issue ad nauseum, and like Aunt Judy, Carl Troller, and others, you bring the same thread up again and again without bringing any new material to the table. In other words, you apparently are either a troll or insane. Definition of insanity: someone who repeats the same action over and over again, always expecting a different result. nate  Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Nate Nagel said in rec.autos.driving: << reply limited to r.a.d >> > Perhaps this is because we've already been over the issue ad nauseum, > and like Aunt Judy, Carl Troller, and others, you bring the same thread > up again and again without bringing any new material to the table. DOn't forget the ECP, just like Aunt Judy.... SignatureSincerely, The New World Order. > > Look at what these TWO a.sholes going by the > > names k_fl... (who use to go by k_flynn) and Larry, [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Perhaps this is because we've already been over the issue > ad nauseum, Then why are they spending so much effort deliberately disrupting the thread with their obfuscations? Thirty some posts from them in only a couple hours time, and NOT A ONE OF THEM addressing the points I made. If my arguments were so "ad nauseum" then one should think they would merely ignore the whole thread. But, NO! They couldn't do that, could they? Clearly, they are seeking to clutter the thread so badly with their FOAMING AT THE MOUTH BULLSHIT LIES that anybody who might be browsing through would give up seeking anything responsive, and merely give up. These a.sholes couldn't have that, could they? They aren't interested in the truth. Their only interested in obfuscating the truth with their prolific bullshit. After all, their very occupations rely on the propagation of this LIE that Driving Safely is a privilege. > you bring the same thread up again and again without > bringing any new material to the table. The premise is the same, but the supporting arguments are somewhat different. Regardless, if you think they are the same or not, the truth is the truth, no matter how many times you ignore it. Now, you will either address the arguments I have made, or you will put your blinders on and go away, or you will prove yourself to be yet another disrupter of truth. > In other words, you apparently are either a troll or insane. Apparently, you are a disrupter, and a personally insulting a.shole. > Definition of insanity: someone who repeats the same action > over and over again, always expecting a different result. Who said I expected anything different from the a.sholes k_flynn or Larry? Although, I was a somewhat surprised by their voluminous obfuscations. That was different! Thirty posts in only a couple hours! Wow! But, as I fully expected, not a one of them actually addressing the points. When one is spreading the truth, they usually end up having to repeat it numerous times. I will continue to spread this truth, and I will continue to present my supporting arguments. Definition of insanity: someone who thinks personally insulting the messenger proves the message wrong. You will now either address the points I have made, or you will put on your blinders and go away, or you will prove yourself to be an insane disrupting troll. > > Look at what these TWO a.sholes going by the names k_fl... (who use to > > go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > > > They always have been, and they always will be LYING a.sholes. Interesting, since he never was able to show anything we said as a lie, yet he is the one who LIED when he completely fabricated a court case to bolster his losing argument. He is a doper who has said he wants to kill LEOs. > > > Look at what these TWO a.sholes going by the names k_fl... (who use to > > > go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > lie, yet he is the one who LIED when he completely fabricated a court > case to bolster his losing argument. I have a standing offer to pay anyone $1.00 per lie they can find I have made on Usenet. Proffy, of course, has yet to try to collect. He can't find any. After all, its not like I'm the one who fabricates court opinions! Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), proffsl said in rec.autos.driving: << ECP removed >> > Larry is a LYING a.shole. > K_Flynn is a LYING a.shole You ought to check out ne.weather. They got a guy there who does lists also. > They always have been, and they always will be LYING a.sholes. HEY! I resent this. Am I not a lying a.shole too, seeing as I posted a challenge to your assertation? Signaturenecromancer Deadly Psychopath. And Proud of it, Man!! > troll troll troll stool sample And by engaing the the same behavior, and resorting to shouting and name-calling, you expect to get listened to *how*? I - and likely most anyone here & happening to read this thread - would sooner pay attention to a recognized and respected name from the MTR community. We've been through this rubbish before. Back under yr bridge please. > And by engaing the the same behavior, and resorting > to shouting and name-calling, you expect to get > listened to *how*? You must be speaking of k_flynn and Larry. If you look into the "Your Right to Drive" thread, I have resorted to NO name-calling. At this time, there are already 50+ posts in that thread, in less than 20 hours time, where 90% of them were posted by k_flynn and Larry, who spend there every breath spewing personal insults and screaming at me, doing everything they can to totally screw up the thread, so that anybody who might be brousing through would give up trying to find any reasonable posts in it. AND YOU SIT HERE PRETENDING TO LECTURE ME??? > I - and likely most anyone here & happening to read this > thread - would sooner pay attention to a recognized and > respected name from the MTR community. Hahahahaha!!! Those who are actually the one's committing the very offenses you falsely accused me of above! Go look at the thread. Fully 90% of the thread is filled with k_flynn and Larry responses, and 100% of them consist of personal insults, libelous accusations, and outright lies. ZERO PERCENT of their posts even pretend to address any of the points I made. And, NOWHERE in that thread do I make any personal attacks against them. In fact, I have completely IGNORED their personal insults, libelous accusations and outright lies. > We've been through this rubbish before. Then, go lecture k_flynn and Larry about it, and tell them it's about time their repetitive rubbish cease. > Back under yr bridge please. If you don't like reading what I have to say, don't expect me to quit writing it. Instead, I suggest you simply ignore me, and go away. I will continue to speak the truth as I see it, and you will either address the points I have made, or you will put on your blinders and go away, or you will prove yourself to be the disrupting troll. > > And by engaing the the same behavior, and resorting > > to shouting and name-calling, you expect to get [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and outright lies. ZERO PERCENT of their posts even pretend to > address any of the points I made. Again you prove yourself to be the LIAR, Proffy. Between me and Larry, we have posted 25 of the 55 posts here (well, now 27 with this one. That is nowhere near 90%. That's less than half. Maybe you fabricate your own math in addition to LYING with your made- up court cases. > And, NOWHERE in that thread do I make any personal attacks against > them. In fact, I have completely IGNORED their personal insults, > libelous accusations and outright lies. Where have we libeled you, you pot-smoking cop-killer wannabe? > I will continue to speak the truth as I see it... And you will continue to be a lying MORON. > Larry is a LYING a.shole. > K_Flynn is a LYING a.shole I'd think that would make you feel right at home, since you are a LYING a.shole. -- C.R. Krieger (out) > > Larry is a LYING a.shole. > > K_Flynn is a LYING a.shole > > I'd think that would make you feel right at home, since you are a > LYING a.shole. You are a LYING a.shole. > > > Larry is a GIFTED ATTORNEY. > > > K_Flynn is a GREAT FATHER AND PROVIDER FOR HIS FAMILY [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I AM a LYING a.shole. We know that, Proffy, from the time you were caught FABRICATING a court case!! Bwahahahahaahaaa! > Look at what these TWO PERFECT GENTLEMEN going by the names k_fl... (who use to > go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" > thread. Omigod, Proffy! THAT's why you thought I'd changed my "identity?" You are truly a kook. Dig this, stoner: k_fly,,, and k_flynn are exactly the same, if you bother to check the link to k_fl... Google Groups has been truncating email addresses in their lists. You complete idiot. *I* didn't change anything, I've used the same email and identity for years. You're an utter moron. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.law-enforcement/browse_frm/thread/606883071a4 db2f6/0141590eaff608fc#0141590eaff608fc > They had absolutely no intention of debating the issue, Because we proved you wrong last year on the very same topic and you have nothing new. > yet they felt > compelled to clutter the thread with their lies and personal attacks > to such a degree that it is difficult to even find the issue. The only issue is where are you buying your potent weed these days to think you can repost your LIES all over again? > Anyone > just browsing through it would see a stream of posts coming from these > wonderful, handsome and respectful young men and probably not take the trouble to > follow it through to where the issue is discussed We discussed it last year and you've brought nothing new. When do you get to the part where you begin MAKING UP YOUR OWN COURT CASES!! Bwahahaaahaa!! > In less than an hour, these TWO GENTLEMEN cluttered the thread with > more than 30 posts, back and forth with each other, with the > deliberate intention of so cluttering the thread that few people would > attempt to wade through their sh.t to get to the issue. The only issue is will you share your dope with the rest of the group? > They have not even pretended to address even one of the points I have > made, yet they most loudly and offensively declared themselves the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > They always have been, and they always will be FANTASTIC SPECIMENS OF > UPSTANDING CITIZENRY. Why, thank you, you lug!! > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use > to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" > thread. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.law-enforcement/browse_frm/thread/606883071a4 db2f6/0141590eaff608fc#0141590eaff608fc > They had absolutely no intention of debating the issue, yet they > felt compelled to clutter the thread with their lies and personal [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > take the trouble to follow it through to where the issue is > discussed. I would say that the way you write your material is more likely to chase people away than the number of posts from your detractors. It doesn't take long to get through their stuff. It takes eons to get through and really understand what you're saying because of your unique writing style (odd capitalization, repitition through different phrasing, obscure word usage, little or no supporting material, etc.). Signature--Andy -------------------------------------------------- Andrew G. Tompkins Software Engineer Beaverton, OR http://home.comcast.net/~andytom/Highways -------------------------------------------------- > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use > > to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > unique writing style (odd capitalization, repitition through different > phrasing, obscure word usage, little or no supporting material, etc.). Plus his FABRICATED lies when he makes up his own court cases to suit his argument. > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use > > to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > unique writing style (odd capitalization, repitition through different > phrasing, obscure word usage, little or no supporting material, etc.). You should think about what this poster says Proffy. Just consider it. > In article <28qdnfnuQovXNnXYnZ2dnUVZ_vHin...@comcast.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > You should think about what this poster says Proffy. Just consider it. Larry, he's too busy making up the next court case he intends to cite. Proffy, I told you before, I could support you in a campaign to change the current system, but as was clearly and incontrovertibly proven to you already last year, the current system is completely constitutional, and no number of your LIES and FABRICATED cases which you were caught RED HANDED making up will change that. Only real cases will change that. Have at it, bonehead. > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use > > to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > unique writing style (odd capitalization, repitition through different > phrasing, obscure word usage, little or no supporting material, etc.). Well, I suppose if their not really interested in taking a position on an issue and supporting that position with arguments, but instead really only interested in behaving like buffoons and cluttering up the thread with buffoon sh.t, then you can probably get away with shorter posts. > > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... > > > (who use to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > the thread with buffoon sh.t, then you can probably get away with > shorter posts. Also, if certain others are only interested in reading such buffoonery, such that the more involved material is just too much for them to handle, then I'm not really interested in their participation, either as a contributor, or as an observer. >> > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... >> > > (who use to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to >> > > the "Your Right to Drive" thread. >> > > http://groups.google.com/group/alt.law-enforcement/browse_frm/thread/... >> > > They had absolutely no intention of debating the issue, >> > > yet they felt compelled to clutter the thread with their lies [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> > > sleaze balls and probably not take the trouble to follow it >> > > through to where the issue is discussed. >> > I would say that the way you write your material is more likely >> > to chase people away than the number of posts from your [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> > repitition through different phrasing, obscure word usage, little >> > or no supporting material, etc.). >> Well, I suppose if their not really interested in taking a position on >> an issue and supporting that position with arguments, but instead >> really only interested in behaving like buffoons and cluttering up >> the thread with buffoon sh.t, then you can probably get away with >> shorter posts. >Also, if certain others are only interested in reading such >buffoonery, such that the more involved material is just too much for >them to handle, then I'm not really interested in their participation, >either as a contributor, or as an observer. Fortunately, since you're posting to a public Usenet newsgroup, you don't have any say in who's allowed to respond to your whinings. SignaturePatrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros) AA#2273 LAST GAME: Peoria 6, Houston 1 (March 3) NEXT GAME: Sunday, March 4 at Peoria, 4:05 One last time to get back all the original newgroups The Cheif Instigator wrote: > > > > I would say that the way you write your material is > > > > more likely to chase people away than the number [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > you don't have any say in who's allowed to respond to your > whinings. What are you whining about? I never said I had a say in who's allowed to respond. But, I do have a say in who's, or even the kind of, responses I would be interested in. If that disturbs you, then you could always seek counseling. Otherwise, a refresher in reading comprehension might help stem your misplaced whining. > > > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... > > > > (who use to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > them to handle, then I'm not really interested in their participation, > either as a contributor, or as an observer. Who here is interested in your participation? Anyone? Anyone? > > > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... > > > > (who use to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > them to handle, then I'm not really interested in their participation, > either as a contributor, or as an observer. You are not interested in participation, otherwise you would have tried to come up with cogent replies to our utter destruction of your weak and FABRICATED arguments that you made. Remember, you were the one caught LYING by making up court cases and manufacturing sock puppets. You were proven wrong and you FABRICATED evidence. That's why you couldn't participate. > > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use > > > to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > thread with buffoon sh.t, then you can probably get away with shorter > posts. Proffsl, do you know how to read? He wasn't commenting on the length of your posts! He said it takes eons to get through because of your unique (to be euphemistic) writing style, which includes improper capitalization, repetitiveness, the choice of obscure (and often misspelled) words, and - here's the kicker -"little or no supporting material." So what do you do? You confuse quantity with quality. You say that shorter posts are from people behaving like buffoons, while yours are longer because you have valid points. Trust me, a long post from you is just a long string of incoherent ramblings. It does not in any way indicate your position has any merit whatsoever, you fool. Besides, I'm wondering who you think isn't taking a position. Because Scott, Flynn, and I took a position on this thread last year and crushed you into the ground with our own arguments and citations, as well as by catching you COMPLETELY FABRICATE a court case! >>> Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use >>> to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to >>> Drive" thread. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.law-enforcement/browse_frm/thread/... >>> They had absolutely no intention of debating the issue, yet they >>> felt compelled to clutter the thread with their lies and personal [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > the thread with buffoon sh.t, then you can probably get away with > shorter posts. You confuse quantity with quality. They come out and say what is on their mind. You put up so many impediments to figuring out what it is that you are actually trying to say that it bacomes almost impossible to do so which is what is causing people to choose 'Ignore Conversation' off the Message Menu (or the equivalent on their newsreader). Signature--Andy -------------------------------------------------- Andrew G. Tompkins Software Engineer Beaverton, OR http://home.comcast.net/~andytom/Highways -------------------------------------------------- > >>> Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use > >>> to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Conversation' off the Message Menu (or the equivalent on their > newsreader). Don't forget, Andrew, that he's also a dopehead who dreams of shooting cops and who FABRICATES evidence when he's lost the argument. > > > Look at what these TWO going by the names k_fl... (who use > > > to go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > thread with buffoon sh.t, then you can probably get away with shorter > posts. Proffy, that descrives *you* to a T. We have already taken positions on your "issue" and the conclusion was undeniably shown to be that you are full of sh.t. Already decided, For you to repeat your position doens't make it stink any less. It's been proven wrong, and you even LIE and FABRICATE court cases -- a proven fact! -- in your pitiful crusade. You are the buffoon. > Look at what these TWO a.sholes going by the names k_fl... (who use to > go by k_flynn) and Larry, have done to the "Your Right to Drive" > thread. How can a thread be heckled? A thread is an inanimate object. It is you, proffy, and your legally incorrect, logically incoherent, and factually flawed arguments that are being heckled! And mocked and ridiculed, I'd add. Because of the sheer stupidity of your arguments and the gross contortions of law you make to supposedly support your argument. > It is you, proffy, and your legally incorrect, logically incoherent, and > factually flawed arguments that are being heckled! And mocked and > ridiculed, I'd add. Because of the sheer stupidity of your arguments > and the gross contortions of law you make to supposedly support your > argument. Shhhhh... don't confuse the poor lad with facts ;-) > > It is you, proffy, and your legally incorrect, logically incoherent, and > > factually flawed arguments that are being heckled! And mocked and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Shhhhh... don't confuse the poor lad with facts ;-) He'll just make up some more to take their place! <deleted> Guy, seriously. It's not worth getting in an uproar about this. It's one of the downfalls of Usenet. If I was told tomorrow that every civilized country had banned Usenet news in it's entirety, I wouldn't be shocked. Anybody can come on here and say anything they want about anybody, true or false, and then to make matters worse, Google will be glad to display it for the entire world to see. Unfortunately, you just need to get used to it for now and not let it drive you to a cardiac. Charles R. Whealton Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com > <deleted> > > Guy, seriously. It's not worth getting in an uproar about this. It's > one of the downfalls of Usenet. If I was told tomorrow that every > civilized country had banned Usenet news in it's entirety, I wouldn't > be shocked. I would be shocked, and I would protest and even more. It's not that I think usenet is such a great thing - it's that freedom of speech IS. > Anybody can come on here and say anything they want about anybody, > true or false, and then to make matters worse, Google will be glad to > display it for the entire world to see. And how does that make usenet any different from the internet in general? Free clue: Don't go looking to wikipedia for your reply. > Unfortunately, you just need to get used to it for now and not let it > drive you to a cardiac. > > Charles R. Whealton > Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com > And how does that make usenet any different from the internet in general? > > Free clue: Don't go looking to wikipedia for your reply. Aw, c'mon! Wikipedia's a great reference for finding how virtually any person, place or thing ever has been featured in an episode of The Simpsons. As for USENET, well... "Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." ~ Oscar Wilde on Usenet http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Usenet > > <deleted> > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > - Show quoted text - No question Fred, there's plenty of ABSOLUTELY GREAT stuff in Usenet. The unfortunate part is that by it's design, it's perfect for abuse. And I'm not even talking the guys that the OP was disgruntled at. What the OP is ticked at them for is NOTHING. Charles R. Whealton Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com > > > <deleted> > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > And I'm not even talking the guys that the OP was disgruntled at. > What the OP is ticked at them for is NOTHING. Actually, the OP is ticked because he was caught completely fabricating a court case -- really, he just made up a court case to support him -- and was exposed as a LIAR so he is trying to save face by being extremely abusive. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.