Linux-Advocacy Digest #936, Volume #33 Thu, 26 Apr 01 10:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Communism (theRadical)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (theRadical)
Re: Baseball (jim dutton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:44:27 -0400
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:42:35 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:24:23 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Roberto Alsina"
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> After immigrating I could become a citizen. Yet you said I "will
> >> >> >> never become a juror". That is not something you can possibly know,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Tell us all when you do become a juror within any jurisdiction in the USA.
> >> >>
> >> >> Let me guess... I immigrate, I naturalize, then I get called, eventually,
> >> >> and not disqualify myself, then I am not disqualified during jury selection.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >how much did you bribe the INS people to naturalizes you, you ignorant twit.
> >>
> >> Who told you I naturalized?
> >
> >
> >So, you admit that you have never passed the naturalization test,
> >which requires you to demonstrate that you understand the Constition
> >(which includes the 2nd Amendment)
>
> What's a constition? Anyway, I am not bound by your constitution,
> knowing it is not important.
You claim to be in the United States.
As long as you are on US soil, thne you are legally bound by it.
Hope that helps.
>
> I have not passed the naturalization test because I have no need
No surprise there.
> for it, Aaron, I am a citizen of where I live.
And from what you have said so far, you couldn't pass the
test if you tried (of course, I think a lot of Americans
couldn't pass it either. If we required Americans to pass
a the same citizenship test before being allowed to vote,
we'd have a lot less of your dumb-ass socialism).
You're still bound by the US Constitution as long as you are within
the borders of the United States.
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:45:44 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:39:03 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:55:22 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >theRadical wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:15:10 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>chrisv wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> LOL! Maybe right after you "prove" to everyone that you're not
>> >> >>> actually using Windows 98, right?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The only way to prove it would be to reveal what platform I'm
>> >> >>actually running.
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes, I realize that you have an excuse. You always have SOME excuse
>> >> >for just NOT "answering the damn question" when you bluff has been
>> >> >called.
>> >>
>> >> next, kulkis will drop the thread and pretend the conversation never
>> >> happened. he is nothing than a tired little punk who lies and tries
>> >> to intimidate.
>> >
>> >You lose.
>>
>> actually, i just haven't won, yet.
>
>And you never will.
wrong.
>
>The reason you will never win is because you only fight to 'not lose'
wrong.
>
>And anybody who decides that winning is not his goal will eventually lose.
possibly.
>
>In fact, the moment he has decided that winning is out of the question,
>he has, in fact, lost.
possibly.
>
>
>Anyone who REFUSES to arm himself against violent felons has made
>the choice to not win....therefore, you have decided to lose
in your lying doltish opinion.
>
>It's only a matter of time.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:46:20 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:39:32 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:55:47 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >theRadical wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:15:10 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>chrisv wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> LOL! Maybe right after you "prove" to everyone that you're not
>> >> >>> actually using Windows 98, right?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The only way to prove it would be to reveal what platform I'm
>> >> >>actually running.
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes, I realize that you have an excuse. You always have SOME excuse
>> >> >for just NOT "answering the damn question" when you bluff has been
>> >> >called.
>> >>
>> >> next, kulkis will drop the thread and pretend the conversation never
>> >> happened.
>> >
>> >You lose
>> >
>> >> he is nothing than a tired little punk who lies and tries
>> >> to intimidate.
>> >
>> >No, I'm an old war vet.
>> >
>>
>> gee, a unix programmer, war vet, law enforcement officer, maritime
>> expert and a constitutional lawyer all rapped up in one foul little
>> slimy package.
>
>Specialization is for morons like yourself.
and lying is for dolts like yourself.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:47:30 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:40:03 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 12:13:25 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >theRadical wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 03:48:20 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:43:17 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:10:20 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:27:59 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:26:20 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:49:32 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:31:15 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >theRadical wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:06:25 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >the Democratic Party is a bunch of Marxists, who, knowing
>that using
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >the name Communists would be bad PR, engage in a campaign
>of deception
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >to get the populace of the country to vote for their own
>enslavement.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >ANYBODY who seeks to enslave others sacrifices any claim
>to his own life.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Hope that helps.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> which means soooo [sic] much coming from a fucking idiot
>twat such as
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> yourself.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Gonna come say that to my face?
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> i'm still waiting for you to show up to repossess my vehicle
>and
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> explain your ridiculous theory that a ship captain is nothing
>more
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> that a paper pusher.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Spot the strawman arguments.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> strawman? you threatened to confiscate my car as part of you
>duties
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> as a law enforcement officer.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Wrong on two counts.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> >I said, by your logic, I should, as a government agent, be able
>> >> >> >> >> >> >to confiscate your car
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> wrong, you said you WERE a government agent
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >Yes, I am.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> well then, show up and confiscate my vehicle asshole.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >That wouldn't be fun...you'd be expecting me.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >Nah, it's much more fun to snatch it when you least expect it,
>> >> >> >> >and have made absolutely no provisions for alternative methods.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >You know...those alternative methods that you insist EVERYBODY ELSE
>> >> >> >> >should be using.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> you are nothing but a chicken shit usenet bully. why don't you quit
>> >> >> >> spewing your crap and shut the fuck up.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >So, in other words, when TheRaDICKal wants the government to steal
>> >> >> >everybody's self-defence tools, that's ok,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> i NEVER have advocated confiscation of weapons dick head.
>> >> >
>> >> >..but that's what you dream about every night, isn't it, fascist prick.
>> >>
>> >> not at all asshole. however, thanks for admitting that you lied about
>> >> me wanting to "steal everybody's self-defense tools." you make it
>> >> very easy to prove you are nothing but a lying sack of shit.
>> >
>> >You claimed that anyone who can't "prove" to your satisfaction that they
>> >need a weapon should have it confiscated.
>>
>> i never said such a thing. you are lying. your conjecture is not
>> fact. otherwise, post the quote
>> right here --------->
>
>
>No need. Your reputations preceeds you.
another kulkis lie proved. you are an idiot kulkis. why don't you
just give up you fucking liar.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:48:38 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:53:58 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Duh-Ridiculed one wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:03:49 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Gunner ©" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >> > >> >> >WEEEEE! I get dibs on the video rights! And we can split the fee when
>> >> > >> >> >we send numbnuts body to a medical school.
>> >> > >> >> >
>> >> > >> >> >Aaron... try to draw it out as long as possible, so we can see lots of
>> >> > >> >> >his blood and hear the sounds of breaking bones.. Ive already got a
>> >> > >> >> >buyer for the master tape.
>> >> > >> >> >
>> >> > >> >> >Gunner
>> >> > >> >>
>> >> > >> >> why doesn't it surprise me that a sick gun nut fuck like gunner would
>> >> > >> >> think such trash?
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> >Because he's got a good sense of humor. :-)
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> >Sue
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Thanks Sue!
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> And of course..I have a good business sense as well. I could indeed
>> >> > >> sell a video of Aaron giving the Radical a serious attitude adjustment.
>> >> > >> ..Afterall.. wouldnt Libertarian/Conservitive, with more than 6 weeks
>> >> > >> on the net.. love to see a troll who's limited vocabulary includes
>> >> > >> "sick gun nut fuck" , get his shit scattered? Then there are the
>> >> > >> T-shirt rights...and the bumper sticker, beer and popcorn
>> >> > >> residuals..hence the request to draw it out as long as possible.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> T-shirt example:
>> >> > >> Front Side..
>> >> > >> "This is a troll." (picture of a gnormlish nerd like Radical in front of
>> >> > >> a computer)
>> >> > >> Backside..
>> >> > >> " This is a troll after Aaron" (picture of a roadkill with a sandaled
>> >> > >> foot and clawed, broken fingered hand, sticking out of the puddle)
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Picture the Budwieser frogs... "grease" "a" "troll"
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Could you post a price list please. <G> Any discounts available?
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Sue
>> >> >
>> >> > Ma'am..for you , Ill make sure you get a good selection of every thing
>> >> > for free.
>> >>
>> >> Everything?
>> >>
>> >> But...sue's a married woman.
>> >
>> >I am? You mean that paperwork I got from the court in 1987 was fake?
>> >Geeze, I hope this doesn't get out because I sure don't want The Asshole
>> >showing up at my door demanding his marital "rights". eeewwww. If I am
>> >still married, as you say, I must say that these last 14 years have been
>> >the best part of it. <G>
>> >
>> >Sue (who is "taken" but not married)
>>
>> just more proof that "kulkis the shit head" has absolutely no idea of
>> what he speaks.
>
>Humor isn't your strong suit, is it, Duh-Ridicule....
there is nothing funny about a pathetic little lying asshole such as
yourself kulkis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: 26 Apr 2001 13:49:08 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:37:22 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:04:51 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:34:44 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>>It can be dangrous for women to walk alone.
>> >> >
>> >> >>So, women should be forbidden from doing anything that's dangerous?
>> >> >
>> >> >What a jerk. Are you just a troll now? We know you're not that
>> >> >stupid...
>> >>
>> >> In the part you snipped, I introduced the stuff about women and walking
>> >> alone by saying "Aaron believes women are better off when they are NOT
>> >> ALLOWED to walk alone".
>> >>
>> >> >No reasonable person can leap from "women should have the CHOICE of
>> >> >carrying a gun for personal protection" to "women should be forbidden
>> >> >from doing anything that's dangerous".
>> >>
>> >> Actually, it goes exactly the other way around. Aaron is pro forbidding
>> >> women the right to walk alone, because they would be in danger.
>> >
>> >I never ADVOCATED such a thing.
>>
>> You said women are better off in Saudi Arabia, where they are forbidden
>> from leaving the house unaccompanied.
>
>From a quality of life standpoint, they are MUCH better off.
>
>I did not say that it was better in every single respect, I said
>that AS A WHOLE, they have a better life.
Well, the incredible oppression and lack of freedom apparently
are unimportant to you.
Perhaps you would be better off in prison. You can't go out,
unless you are escorted, but you get three meals a day, and
you meet people.
>> > I merely noted that the women who
>> >live in one of the societies where that is the custom, have a much
>> >*BETTER* life than what Feminism has given American women.
>>
>> Well, make up your mind: do you advocate what you believe is worse,
>> or you advocate they should not leave the house alone?
>
>your mental masturbation is unbecoming.
I know you prefer actual masturbation, but you have to wait
until your mom looks the other way.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: 26 Apr 2001 13:50:57 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:40:06 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:45:09 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >On 25 Apr 2001 18:42:14 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:34:44 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>>>It can be dangrous for women to walk alone.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>>So, women should be forbidden from doing anything that's dangerous?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>What a jerk. Are you just a troll now? We know you're not that
>> >> >>>stupid...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>In the part you snipped, I introduced the stuff about women and walking
>> >> >>alone by saying "Aaron believes women are better off when they are NOT
>> >> >>ALLOWED to walk alone".
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >And you believe that women should NOT BE ALLOWED the tools to protect
>> >> >themselves while they walk alone.
>> >>
>> >> If you advocate they should not walk alone, that doesn't make
>> >> any difference does it? And anyway, I did not. Check the archives.
>> >>
>> >> >>>No reasonable person can leap from "women should have the CHOICE of
>> >> >>>carrying a gun for personal protection" to "women should be forbidden
>> >> >>>from doing anything that's dangerous".
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Actually, it goes exactly the other way around. Aaron is pro forbidding
>> >> >>women the right to walk alone, because they would be in danger.
>> >> >>I am pro giving them that right. You just misunderstood the whole thing.
>> >> >
>> >> >But we do understand thay you would like to deny women the right to
>> >> >protect themselves.
>> >>
>> >> You misunderstand. Everyone should be entitled to protect themselves.
>> >> Women, men, transvestites and tax collectors alike. In fact, they ARE
>> >> entitled to protect themselves. All that straw is gonna cause you
>> >> hay fever.
>> >
>> >Nice back-pedal into agreeing with what WE have been saying all along.
>>
>> You have all along been saying women are better off when they can not leave
>> their houses without male permission.
>
>No. You're agreeing that people should be allowed to have the necessary
>means (i.e. guns) to defend themselves.
If you say "No." one expects your next sentence will give an alternative
to what you deny, or show how what you are replying to is wrong, or
maybe give support to your negative. You need to relax and write more
coherently.
>GAME
>SET
>MATCH
>
>
>MORON.
Nah, you have not won, and this is not tennis.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 26 Apr 2001 13:54:24 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:44:27 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:42:35 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:24:23 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"Roberto Alsina"
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> After immigrating I could become a citizen. Yet you said I "will
>> >> >> >> never become a juror". That is not something you can possibly know,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Tell us all when you do become a juror within any jurisdiction in the USA.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Let me guess... I immigrate, I naturalize, then I get called, eventually,
>> >> >> and not disqualify myself, then I am not disqualified during jury selection.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >how much did you bribe the INS people to naturalizes you, you ignorant twit.
>> >>
>> >> Who told you I naturalized?
>> >
>> >
>> >So, you admit that you have never passed the naturalization test,
>> >which requires you to demonstrate that you understand the Constition
>> >(which includes the 2nd Amendment)
>>
>> What's a constition? Anyway, I am not bound by your constitution,
>> knowing it is not important.
>
>You claim to be in the United States.
Quotes please. I am not, and have not been, in several years, in the US.
In fact, I am pretty far from the US.
>As long as you are on US soil, thne you are legally bound by it.
Unless I am a diplomat.
>Hope that helps.
It helps seing you have some strange thoughts in your mind that I
have no clue where they came from.
>> I have not passed the naturalization test because I have no need
>
>No surprise there.
Indeed.
>> for it, Aaron, I am a citizen of where I live.
>
>And from what you have said so far, you couldn't pass the
>test if you tried
Oh, I can lie in tests adeptly.
>You're still bound by the US Constitution as long as you are within
>the borders of the United States.
Really? Gee, maybe I knew that already when I said I am not
bound by the US constitution.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
soc.men,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:55:29 GMT
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:10:10 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chad Everett wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 20:28:52 GMT, Scott Erb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Chad Everett wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:22:58 -0400, Scott D. Erb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Lynette Warren wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>what a scam American feminism truly is
>> >> >
>> >> >How do you define feminism? In feminist theory they are many kinds. A
>> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> >>
>> >> What the heck is "feminist theory"?
>> >
>> >Did you read beyond that point? I explained a bit about it.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Yes I did. What I gathered is that "feminist theory" is very much like
>> "bigotry theory".
>
>
>Feminism is a system for oppressing the average men.
>
>Males in *elite* positions in our society support it, because they'll
>use any excuse to oppress other men.
>
>
>Hope that helps.
more ignorant ramblings of a proven liar.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jim dutton)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Baseball
Date: 26 Apr 2001 13:55:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>jim dutton wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Nomen Nescio wrote:
>> >>
>> >> how many retailers sell linux machines again?
>> >> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>> >>
>> >> p.s. sneering & not bathing does not a viable marketing strategy make
>> >
>> >Only a moron would wonder about the sales of a
>> >free downloadable operating system.
>> >
>> >Into the breech steps jackie!
>>
>> If sarcasm bit you on the ass Chris would you notice?
>
>It didn't bite me, though. Sarcasm is often conveyed by
>voice tone, or, in text, by quotes and other symbols.
Well as this is a written medium your falacious ploy at voice tone
is a dog that isn't gonna hunt. As far as sarcasm being annotated by
quotes you simply pulle dthat out of your ass. Nice try but considerably
lame. Other symbols! You really are one dumb muthafucker.
>Although jackie may have meant sarcasm, his writing did
>not convey it.
On planet Chris the sanctimonous tard.
>> Never mind we saw the answer.
>Who's "we"?
Your mother and I.
>> -Jeem, The stupidity runs deep in that one
>
>Uhhhh, is /that/ one "sarcasm"?
Is that tard script?
-Jeem, Look Chris---------><blink><bold><font size=10billion><ul>""SARCASM"".
========================================================================
http://www.ejeem.com Autococker2000/Dye SS
Steatopygias's 'R' Us. doh#0000000005 That ain't no Hottentot.
Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. tbtw#6. s.s.m#8. There ain't no more
"Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth." -- JFK
========================================================================
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************