GI Scott?

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 12:10:51 -0800 (PST), twobuddha
wrote this crap:


http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...40seanet.com&o...


Thanks, dumb****. You just proved yourself to be a liar. Show
anywhere in that post where I claimed to be a combat journalist, or to
have worn camouflage garb. You stupid ****ing idiot, Joe Horvath.

It's not there. Shortly afterwards, you were questioned on what unit
you were in, what battle you fought in, etc.

Since you weren't drafted, and didn't volunteer, you had to make up
more lies, and you chose, "Combat journalist," for a College
newspaper, no less, so we couldn't look up any of your articles.

I say again, if you're in a combat zone, cammo is mandatory.




A mighty Hungarian warrior
The blood of Attila runs through me

On Dec 2, 4:25*pm, Jay Pique wrote:
On Dec 2, 7:05*pm, Alan Baker wrote:

So: will you run away from the questions again, or will you actually
have the nads just to *type*?

After 15 years, do you really think he's going to recant? *At this
point he probably actually believes he was there. *The man (and I use
that word loosely) is completely devoid of logic, rational thought or
morals. *He's absolutely delusional, and absolutely fascinating. *To
be honest, he's the only reason I still check in here at r.s.a.

Damn. I never cease to be amazed. Another dickless freak calling me
crazy.
Same old, same old. Geez, you guys are boring. Can't you come up
with something new?
What makes it even more insane is that this Dickless Freak is
supporting Fruitcake Baker, who IS delusional, devoid of logic and
rational thought.
How utterly amoral. Irony meter goes Fruitcake.
I wish I could say I'm getting tired of typing THIS same old, same
old, but I still love it.
Go **** yourself, freak.

On Dec 2, 5:07*pm, Ted Waldron wrote:
In article
,

*twobuddha wrote:
Hey, Ted? *Show me where I ever claimed to be a combat journalist or
to have worn camo.

So are stating that you were never in Vietnam in 1972 as an accredited
journalist?

It is a simple question Scooter, have you ever been to Vietnam? Were you
ever an accredited reporter in a war zone?

I'll answer that right after you show the post, Ted.
You know, when you committed perjury and stated in court that I had
threatened you?
Amazing how you have different standards: you think you can demand
answers from me, but when YOU commit felonies, you continue to ignore
the reality that you lied in court.
Same old, same old. Can't you come up with something new, Ted? Like
admitting you deliberately lied to a judge while under oath?

On Dec 2, 5:17*pm, A mighty Hungarian wrote:
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 12:10:51 -0800 (PST), twobuddha
wrote this crap:



http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...40seanet.com&o....

Thanks, dumb****. *You just proved yourself to be a liar. *Show
anywhere in that post where I claimed to be a combat journalist, or to
have worn camouflage garb. *You stupid ****ing idiot, Joe Horvath.

It's not there.

You certainly made those statements, you stupid ****ing idiot, Joe
Horvath.
Did you lie? Admit it.

*Shortly afterwards, you were questioned on what unit
you were in, what battle you fought in, etc.

Never answered, either. You gotta show up in person to see that,
freak. Come visit.

Since you weren't drafted, and didn't volunteer, you had to make up
more lies, and you chose, "Combat journalist," for a College
newspaper, no less, so we couldn't look up any of your articles.

You tell the same lie again.

I say again, if you're in a combat zone, cammo is mandatory.

You tell the same ignorant, stupid, dumb**** lie again, Joe Horvath.
Typical of you: when busted lying, you just keep lying and lying and
lying, Joe Horvath.

In article
,
twobuddha wrote:

On Dec 2, 4:25*pm, Jay Pique wrote:
On Dec 2, 7:05*pm, Alan Baker wrote:

So: will you run away from the questions again, or will you actually
have the nads just to *type*?

After 15 years, do you really think he's going to recant? *At this
point he probably actually believes he was there. *The man (and I use
that word loosely) is completely devoid of logic, rational thought or
morals. *He's absolutely delusional, and absolutely fascinating. *To
be honest, he's the only reason I still check in here at r.s.a.

Damn. I never cease to be amazed. Another dickless freak calling me
crazy.
Same old, same old. Geez, you guys are boring. Can't you come up
with something new?
What makes it even more insane is that this Dickless Freak is
supporting Fruitcake Baker, who IS delusional, devoid of logic and
rational thought.
How utterly amoral. Irony meter goes Fruitcake.
I wish I could say I'm getting tired of typing THIS same old, same
old, but I still love it.
Go **** yourself, freak.

I notice you have once again (does this make three times? Yeah -- it
does!) avoid answering the simple questions I asked you about the
difference between your claims of having been a journalist who was in
combat (hand to hand, no less!) and a "combat journalist", Cupcake.

I realize you claim to believe I'm "insane", but surely you'd like to
educate the other people who are reading this, right?

:-)

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg

In article ,
A mighty Hungarian wrote:

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 12:10:51 -0800 (PST), twobuddha
wrote this crap:


http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...40seanet.com&o...


Thanks, dumb****. You just proved yourself to be a liar. Show
anywhere in that post where I claimed to be a combat journalist, or to
have worn camouflage garb. You stupid ****ing idiot, Joe Horvath.

It's not there. Shortly afterwards, you were questioned on what unit
you were in, what battle you fought in, etc.

Since you weren't drafted, and didn't volunteer, you had to make up
more lies, and you chose, "Combat journalist," for a College
newspaper, no less, so we couldn't look up any of your articles.

I say again, if you're in a combat zone, cammo is mandatory.

As distasteful as I find it to be on the same side of any issue with
Cupcake, I don't think you're right about camouflage being manadatory in
Vietnam.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg

In article
,
twobuddha wrote:

Dude, it's right there --

"Then I went to Nam (journalist, not soldier) and
spent a lovely time ducking bullets from people who
were trying to kill me while I was busy doing the same
thing to them. Got down to hand to hand at one point,
Jeremiah. *Loser dies. *I'm alive. *Two bullet holes,
but alive."

You claim to have to Vietnam AS A JOURNALIST who DUCKED BULLETS from
people TRYING TO KILL YOU while you were busy TRYING TO DO THE SAME
THING TO THEM. *You even "got down to hand to hand" and the "LOSER DIES"
and you have "TWO BULLET HOLES." *

And now you claim you weren't a combat journalist?

Excuse me? I never claimed to be a combat journalist. Whole
different animal. That is an exagerration at best and outright
bull**** at worst
So you freaks made it up, and you keep repeating the same pathetic,
ridiculous, transparent lie.

Then educate me. What are you claiming about going to Vietnam as a
reporter, trying to kill Viet Cong, ACTUALLY killing one in hand to hand
combat and getting TWO BULLET HOLES in the course of killing this
soldier, all as a college journalist. I won't even get in to how you
claimed to refuse treatment for your battle injuries until others were
treated.

So Scott? What are you claiming?

*What are you
claiming then? *I don't recall Dan Rather killing anybody with his BARE
HANDS in Vietnam.

Rather deserves the title. I do not and have never claimed that
description.
We're not discussing what I claim, Dickless Dave. We're discussing
what YOU claim, and you freaks made up an outright, ridiculous,
laughable lie.
How pathetic. Come up with something new, Dickless Dave.

Scott, you couldn't reframe a picture, much less an argument. Nice try
though.

Let try this: If you said, "I wear a blue uniform and carry a gun and
drive around in a white car with blue lights on top and give speeding
tickets and arrest people and take them to jail because I've sworne an
oath to uphold the law."

And I said "so you're saying you're a police officer," and you said "I
never said that!!!!" It would bering us to this point where we ask,
"well then, what did you claim to be doing when you were reporting and
killing Vietnamese?"

Seriously, I know this has been debunked by Vietnam Veterans and pretty
much anybody else above the rank of cubscout, but still, you can't unsay
it. *Just admit you made it up and move on.

Never been debunked, either. Just admit you got caught lying, lied
some more in this post, apologize for lying, and stop lying.
Ooooops, forgot. You can't do that. Absolutely incapable of
admitting you are a liar. It would ruin all your dickless
psychopathic fun.
The same old lies, the same laughable games from psychopaths and
freaks. How dickless. How pathetic. Normal for you.

Yeah yeah.. Sticks and stones and all that. How about you put half the
effort you put into name calling and answer the question. That what Dan
Rather would do.

In article
,
twobuddha wrote:

On Dec 2, 4:25*pm, Jay Pique wrote:
On Dec 2, 7:05*pm, Alan Baker wrote:

So: will you run away from the questions again, or will you actually
have the nads just to *type*?

After 15 years, do you really think he's going to recant? *At this
point he probably actually believes he was there. *The man (and I use
that word loosely) is completely devoid of logic, rational thought or
morals. *He's absolutely delusional, and absolutely fascinating. *To
be honest, he's the only reason I still check in here at r.s.a.

Damn. I never cease to be amazed. Another dickless freak calling me
crazy.
Same old, same old. Geez, you guys are boring. Can't you come up
with something new?

Scott the reason no comes up with anything new is because you do appear
to have lost touch with reality. That and you are exceptionally
unpleasant.

People aren't trying to "call you names" and think up new insults. They
are stating what everyone sees but you. There is no conspiracy against
you. No one (NO ONE) is jealous of you. No one cares about free skis
or lift tickets. You are extremely unlikable AND provide immediate
feedback. There is no company I know of that has the sort of "live
customer service" that you provide freely.

You are the equivalent of the guy that sits in the dunking both at the
fair. You toss out generic insults and squeal like a little girl every
time (EVERY DAMN TIME!) someone hits the bulls-eye and send you down
into the water. AND practically every shot IS a bulls-eye.

Anyway, I know insight isn't your strong suit, but still... show this to
Jeff and ask him what his take is on it.

Dave

On Dec 2, 7:25*pm, Dave Cartman wrote:
In article
,



*twobuddha wrote:
Dude, it's right there --

"Then I went to Nam (journalist, not soldier) and
spent a lovely time ducking bullets from people who
were trying to kill me while I was busy doing the same
thing to them. Got down to hand to hand at one point,
Jeremiah. *Loser dies. *I'm alive. *Two bullet holes,
but alive."

You claim to have to Vietnam AS A JOURNALIST who DUCKED BULLETS from
people TRYING TO KILL YOU while you were busy TRYING TO DO THE SAME
THING TO THEM. *You even "got down to hand to hand" and the "LOSER DIES"
and you have "TWO BULLET HOLES." *

And now you claim you weren't a combat journalist?

Excuse me? *I never claimed to be a combat journalist. *Whole
different animal. *That is an exagerration at best and outright
bull**** at worst
So you freaks made it up, and you keep repeating the same pathetic,
ridiculous, transparent lie.

Then educate me. *What are you claiming about going to Vietnam as a
reporter, trying to kill Viet Cong, ACTUALLY killing one in hand to hand
combat and getting TWO BULLET HOLES in the course of killing this
soldier, all as a college journalist. *I won't even get in to how you
claimed to refuse treatment for your battle injuries until others were
treated.

So Scott? *What are you claiming?



*What are you
claiming then? *I don't recall Dan Rather killing anybody with his BARE
HANDS in Vietnam.

Rather deserves the title. *I do not and have never claimed that
description.
We're not discussing what I claim, Dickless Dave. *We're discussing
what YOU claim, and you freaks made up an outright, ridiculous,
laughable lie.
How pathetic. *Come up with something new, Dickless Dave.

Scott, you couldn't reframe a picture, much less an argument. *Nice try
though. *

Let try this: *If you said, "I wear a blue uniform and carry a gun and
drive around in a white car with blue lights on top and give speeding
tickets and arrest people and take them to jail because I've sworne *an
oath to uphold the law."

And I said "so you're saying you're a police officer," and you said "I
never said that!!!!" *It would bering us to this point where we ask,
"well then, what did you claim to be doing when you were reporting and
killing Vietnamese?"



Seriously, I know this has been debunked by Vietnam Veterans and pretty
much anybody else above the rank of cubscout, but still, you can't unsay
it. *Just admit you made it up and move on.

Never been debunked, either. *Just admit you got caught lying, lied
some more in this post, apologize for lying, and stop lying.
Ooooops, forgot. *You can't do that. *Absolutely incapable of
admitting you are a liar. *It would ruin all your dickless
psychopathic fun.
The same old lies, the same laughable games from psychopaths and
freaks. *How dickless. *How pathetic. *Normal for you.

Yeah *yeah.. Sticks and stones and all that. *How about you put half the
effort you put into name calling and answer the question. *That what Dan
Rather would

This is where / when he runs...

On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:02:45 -0800, Alan Baker
wrote this crap:

I say again, if you're in a combat zone, cammo is mandatory.

As distasteful as I find it to be on the same side of any issue with
Cupcake, I don't think you're right about camouflage being manadatory in
Vietnam.

Ever heard of, "jungle fatigues? They were mandatory in combat zones.
Then there was this face paint, called," cammo sticks." They were
mandatory in combat zones.




A mighty Hungarian warrior
The blood of Attila runs through me