On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:37:50 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 31/08/11 09:55, d wrote:

Its only people desperate to score a point no matter what who resort
to commenting on typos. If there isn't some usenet law about that then
there should be. It doesn't make you look clever - just rather petty and
sad.

Not at all. It's simply a bit more evidence that you are a rather stupid
and poorly-educated chap, whose views can be discounted as those of a
rather stupid and poorly-educated chap.

Or alternatively I'm quite busy at work, my newsreader doesn't have a
built in spell checker and I've got better things to do than proof read
posts to keep tedious pedants like you happy.

B2003

On 02/09/11 09:43, d wrote:
On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:37:50 +0100
The Real wrote:
On 31/08/11 09:55, d wrote:

Its only people desperate to score a point no matter what who resort
to commenting on typos. If there isn't some usenet law about that then
there should be. It doesn't make you look clever - just rather petty and
sad.

Not at all. It's simply a bit more evidence that you are a rather stupid
and poorly-educated chap, whose views can be discounted as those of a
rather stupid and poorly-educated chap.

Or alternatively I'm quite busy at work, my newsreader doesn't have a
built in spell checker and I've got better things to do than proof read
posts to keep tedious pedants like you happy.

It's a possibility, I suppose, but since your arguments and factual
knowledge are as atrocious as your spelling and grammar, I'll trust
Occam's Razor and go with "rather stupid and poorly-educated" as the
simplest and therefore most likely hypothesis.

Ian

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 09:48:42 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
Or alternatively I'm quite busy at work, my newsreader doesn't have a
built in spell checker and I've got better things to do than proof read
posts to keep tedious pedants like you happy.

It's a possibility, I suppose, but since your arguments and factual
knowledge are as atrocious as your spelling and grammar, I'll trust
Occam's Razor and go with "rather stupid and poorly-educated" as the
simplest and therefore most likely hypothesis.

Whatever makes you feel superior.

B2003

On 02/09/11 10:00, d wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 09:48:42 +0100

It's a possibility, I suppose, but since your arguments and factual
knowledge are as atrocious as your spelling and grammar, I'll trust
Occam's Razor and go with "rather stupid and poorly-educated" as the
simplest and therefore most likely hypothesis.

Whatever makes you feel superior.

That'll be your spelling, grammar, knowledge and arguments.

Ian

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 11:35:25 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 02/09/11 10:00, d wrote:
On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 09:48:42 +0100

It's a possibility, I suppose, but since your arguments and factual
knowledge are as atrocious as your spelling and grammar, I'll trust
Occam's Razor and go with "rather stupid and poorly-educated" as the
simplest and therefore most likely hypothesis.

Whatever makes you feel superior.

That'll be your spelling, grammar, knowledge and arguments.

You think you're such a clever little **** don't you? This despite the fact
that you hardly ever put forward any justifications for your own arguments,
just try and shoot other peoples down and when that doesn't work resort to
childish name calling and sarcasm.

And just out of interest , what exactly are you a "Real" doctor of? I suspect
it isn't medicine since you'd be far to busy to post on here during the day.

B2003

In article
,
BrianW wrote:

On Aug 31, 5:51*pm, Sam Wilson wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 02:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
BrianW wrote:
Whereas Mr "Auer"-Hudson is an intelligent loon, Bloatar is just a
retard. *One ought to feel sorry for him, really.

When you look this gormless in a photo pal its best not to cast
aspersions:

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/node/54249

Or was that your best Frank Spencer face?

I don't think he looks that odd. *

Oh, I do. I liked Adrian's description of me as "Mr Bean". When the
pic was taken, I told my mrs I thought I looked like a cross between
Frankenstein's monster and Shrek, so Mr Bean is quite an improvement.

Let me just that say that there are a lot of other people who just as
odd, and many are are a darn sight odder.

I'm very uppset, though, that Adrian insinuated that I look like Ed
Miliband. Now that *is* offensive.

Absolutely. Now if Clegg wore glasses...

Sam

In article ,
Alistair Gunn wrote:

In uk.railway Sam Wilson twisted the electrons to say:
In article
,
Nick wrote:
... And I'm afraid
that I find Conservative attitudes completely incompatible with my
understanding of Christianity.
I don't usually like joining in this kind of thread, but let me add an
AOL here.

I thought Christianity was "think of others before yourself" not "have
someone else think of others so you don't have to"?

"Love your enemies."

Sam

On 02/09/11 18:21, Tim Fenton wrote:
In last year's Senate race, he backed Sharron Angle, who had the benefit
of being seriously bat**** mad. That she lost is something Adrian has
had considerable difficulty accepting.

Good grief.

He also claims to be Jewish, but believes in Jesus Christ (or, as he
would say, Yeshua).

Sensible way to hedge your bets, I suppose.

Ian

On 02/09/11 18:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
In ,
Alistair wrote:

I thought Christianity was "think of others before yourself" not "have
someone else think of others so you don't have to"?

"Love your enemies."

Evangelicals /hate/ that long-haired hippy stuff, which is why they tend
to be very light indeed on the teachings of Jesus and very heavy on the
rantings of Paul. The first thing the evangelicals would do if Jesus
came back - once his identity was incontrovertibly established - would
be to put him to death, then claim he came back and told them to carry
on hating.

Ian

In article ,
The Real Doctor wrote:

On 02/09/11 18:48, Sam Wilson wrote:
In ,
Alistair wrote:

I thought Christianity was "think of others before yourself" not "have
someone else think of others so you don't have to"?

"Love your enemies."

Evangelicals /hate/ that long-haired hippy stuff, which is why they tend
to be very light indeed on the teachings of Jesus and very heavy on the
rantings of Paul. The first thing the evangelicals would do if Jesus
came back - once his identity was incontrovertibly established - would
be to put him to death, then claim he came back and told them to carry
on hating.

Not my experience, sorry.

Sam