budds ministry to dodge trucks
From : Annonymous
Q: on sun 7 may 2006 064350 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote on sat 6 may 2006 185104 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote people like me what am i greg well since you asked a christian zealot. not that theres anything wrong with that. thank you. i do try to ensure there will be sufficient evidence for a conviction if a law is passed banning christianity so you like t-bone and the guy considers me to be disturbed... yes disturbed as in not a peace or agitated. beekeep greg i am at peace. more so than any time in my life. these discussions are just one of my ministries. you hit the problem on the head with that budd. i will try to explain this to you in an honest but respectful way. i accept your interest in committing yourself to your religion. you not only have very right to do that i think that you would have everyones support to do that. what you have no right to do is to minister to this ng. we have the same right that you have. most of us have no interest in being ministered to by anyone. we get to chose our religion the same as you. if you have an interest in creating a ng to discuss your religion and to try to convert others to your views regarding your religion i would encourage you to do so. if respect is so important to you and it would appear to be since you seem to be able to find disrespect towards you at every turn here then understand that you have committed the ultimate disrespect to all the members here by coming in and acting as if your religion is the only true and accurate one and that it is the only way to salvation. you have no right to do that. it is not your religion that is getting shoved back at you. no one here would have any interest in chosing a religion for you stop trying to chose one for us. it is that hypocracy and arrogance that are getting shoved back at you. think about it. i am upset that so many can only call me disturbed or insane or worse because i give answers they dont want to hear. thats why it bothered me to hear you chime in with them. i had thought you better than that friend. budd *** posted via a free usenet account from http//www.tera.com *** .
Replies:
From : Annonymous
on sun 07 may 2006 222222 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote true max but fanatisicm is also not effective. i wasnt speaking to the effecacy of his methods merely saying that in terms of rights a term which you used he has as much right to post off topic info as you do. i agree with you then. new born religion and new born ministering turns off many more people than it ever convinces. im not sure thats true. it depends on who the person listening is. thats true. i was speaking in general terms. maybe a bad way to speak but it is true in general terms. it is a real threat to christianity in fact. id like to see the in fact part since ive been looking for such information to whack a local with. i doubt youll find anything statisitical but if you do feel free to draw my attention to it. there is some info on it. i will try to find it and if i can i will link it. i listened in on this debate on another ng that was heavily dominated by christian fundamentalists. it was fascinating to read. person after person came in angry about the preaching rather than the discussion. the ministers real ministers not street corner ones agreed and for the good ones a basic creed tthat they followed was tolerance with the anger and discussion with the angry people. they said time and agin that jesus and god were always open to opposing perspectives and taught compassion and patience now on a factual basis this is way beyond me-i am not a fundamentalist--maybe rather a live and let live christian as to me it is in your heart not your words in your actions not your speech and that again it wasnt christianity that was driving their congregrations away but rather it was people that changed christianity to their own ends and used it as a sword that drove new members away. again they had some good info and some data to support it ill see if i can find it but i would not considerr it the end all of data either. i guess you would have to decide what your goal is. if your goal is to educate people to your perspective and to try to change some of their beliefs then this type of prreaching would be counter productive. again it depends on the listener. if your goal is to simply show off yourself as having moral spremecy to all other forms and thoughts of religion then this type of preaching could be effective. again it depends on the listener. i guess you and budd would both fall into the category of wanting to show yourselves to be somehow superior to the rest of the world. actually as i think about it that does fit you two. im not superior to anything in general. my posts otoh contain more facts that most on here. they are about the same as the core posters excepting certain individuals such as tbone who despite his disbelief in certain laws of physics and math persists in his viewpoint. snoman is another; one who lives in the 60s his info while accurate for 40 years ago needs to be scrutinized for accuracy in the present. and yourself who while thinking youve got all bases covered and looking like youve given due consideratin to all pertinent info persist in posting assumptions and personal observation of character rather than factual information about any one thing. you may be right. like you i am who i am. cant say more because your statement is pretty general too so i cant really argue with what you said. nothing very concrete in there. i would have to add however that i am pretty comfortable with my observations of character. i do think that would be one of my strengths. they are also based on fact. you are who you are and the same with dudd. one only needs to read what you say to have a factual basis upon which to make such opinions. meanwhile miles whom ive disagreed with in the past and nate whom ive had long discussions regarding certain topics and disagreed with his conclusions are both well reasoned individuals. while i have disagreed with them they at least had the courtesy to work with facts. also max i guess then that following your logic which was a little biased again one of your silly assumptions. read my post again. it should be fairly familiar to you and others who have posted the same thing in reply anyone complaining of subject matter on this group. simply put you no like the subject you no hafta read it. or you can argue with it. that seems more to the norm around here anyway dont you think dudd has the right to say anything he wants. i not only have the right to ignore it that is really not an action but an inaction---so in your world dudd and you have the right to say what you want but in order for me to excercise my rights i have to ignore it but i have the right to shove it right back in his face. that is the option that i prefer rather than just ignoring it. thats fine but claiming rights or lack thereof is simply not true. the only right on here
From : Annonymous
on 8 may 2006 075537 -0700 cavedweller jawnwillie@hotmail.com wrote mike simmons wrote on sun 07 may 2006 202613 gmt tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote lets keep this on topic. god drives a dodge. beekeep ahem! beekeep actually god drives a plymouth........ dontcha remember genesis ..... ....and god drove adam and eve from the garden in a fury....... mike ...and wasnt it garlits who established that on the eighth day he created the hemi ah........but did he use a k&n filter .
From : max dodge
there is some info on it. i will try to find it and if i can i will link it. i listened in on this debate on another ng that was heavily dominated by christian fundamentalists. it was fascinating to read. person after person came in angry about the preaching rather than the discussion. the ministers real ministers not street corner ones agreed and for the good ones a basic creed tthat they followed was tolerance with the anger and discussion with the angry people. they said time and agin that jesus and god were always open to opposing perspectives and taught compassion and patience now on a factual basis this is way beyond me-i am not a fundamentalist--maybe rather a live and let live christian as to me it is in your heart not your words in your actions not your speech and that again it wasnt christianity that was driving their congregrations away but rather it was people that changed christianity to their own ends and used it as a sword that drove new members away. again they had some good info and some data to support it ill see if i can find it but i would not considerr it the end all of data either. fundementalists tend to discourage the tolerance of anything and go strictly by the bible. lutherans and in general other protestant denominations encourage tolerance although the actual actions may be somewhat different. catholics are intolerant in doctrine and tolerant in action. given that one set think a 2000 year old tome is the end all of rules and beliefs another encourages tolerance but holds a bias no coincidence that the kkk was largely protestant imo and the last sets up rules which are then broken by the believers only to be forgiven upon some sort of atonement it is not hard to see why chrisitianity has been shelved by new generations. you may be right. like you i am who i am. cant say more because your statement is pretty general too so i cant really argue with what you said. nothing very concrete in there. and how could there be all i know of you is the nature of your posts. in general you post commentary on character not factual rebuttal of information. im sure there is the occassional nugget but i decline the task of finding it. this is not to say that some or all of your posts are without merit. im saying that if one looks for proven fact in them it would be lacking due to the nature of the commentary. i would have to add however that i am pretty comfortable with my observations of character. i do think that would be one of my strengths. good for you. however i must add that i hope its not a strong point of yours given that the comments youve recently applied to me are inaccurate to say the least. they are also based on fact. no they are based on observation. you havent conducted in depth interviews or psychlogical testing thus conclusions on anyones personality as shown in these posts would be presumtuous at best. hell tbone could be a fairly nice guy. misguided but nice. you are who you are and the same with dudd. one only needs to read what you say to have a factual basis upon which to make such opinions. incorrect as any psychologist would tell you. or you can argue with it. that seems more to the norm around here anyway dont you think true you can argue with it but claiming he has no right to post it... nope cant do that. now you are misconstruing what i said. no you used right im sure of that. i was making a point. yup got that part.... what i said or meant to say was simple. meant to say is what got ya into rights.... go back and read it again if you care to. i dont care to. i know now what you mean was to disagree with budds philosophy however you wrote that you disagreed with his right. i did but like many people predicted i came back and got caught up in the discussions again. oh well. summer is out there..... -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author on sun 07 may 2006 222222 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote true max but fanatisicm is also not effective. i wasnt speaking to the effecacy of his methods merely saying that in terms of rights a term which you used he has as much right to post off topic info as you do. i agree with you then. new born religion and new born ministering turns off many more people than it ever convinces. im not sure thats true. it depends on who the person listening is. thats true. i was speaking in general terms. maybe a bad way to speak but it is true in general terms. it is a real threat to christianity in fact. id like to see the in fact part since ive been looking for such information to whack a local with. i doubt youll find anything statisitical but if you do feel free to draw my attention to it. there is some info on it. i will try to find it and if i can i will link
From : Annonymous
on sun 07 may 2006 231429 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote there is some info on it. i will try to find it and if i can i will link it. i listened in on this debate on another ng that was heavily dominated by christian fundamentalists. it was fascinating to read. person after person came in angry about the preaching rather than the discussion. the ministers real ministers not street corner ones agreed and for the good ones a basic creed tthat they followed was tolerance with the anger and discussion with the angry people. they said time and agin that jesus and god were always open to opposing perspectives and taught compassion and patience now on a factual basis this is way beyond me-i am not a fundamentalist--maybe rather a live and let live christian as to me it is in your heart not your words in your actions not your speech and that again it wasnt christianity that was driving their congregrations away but rather it was people that changed christianity to their own ends and used it as a sword that drove new members away. again they had some good info and some data to support it ill see if i can find it but i would not considerr it the end all of data either. fundementalists tend to discourage the tolerance of anything and go strictly by the bible. lutherans and in general other protestant denominations encourage tolerance although the actual actions may be somewhat different. catholics are intolerant in doctrine and tolerant in action. given that one set think a 2000 year old tome is the end all of rules and beliefs another encourages tolerance but holds a bias no coincidence that the kkk was largely protestant imo and the last sets up rules which are then broken by the believers only to be forgiven upon some sort of atonement it is not hard to see why chrisitianity has been shelved by new generations. cant argue with your summary. you may be right. like you i am who i am. cant say more because your statement is pretty general too so i cant really argue with what you said. nothing very concrete in there. and how could there be all i know of you is the nature of your posts. yet they reveal a good deal about me. in general you post commentary on character not factual rebuttal of information. im not sure that is true either except in the case of dudd who i have pretty much given any hope on. i tried discussing the matter with him but it was like talking to dirt. no recognition. character does matter though max and in the final analysis may matter more than data or facts. character reveals a lot about a person. probably more than your factual rebuttal arguments. im sure there is the occassional nugget well thanks. but i decline the task of finding it. oh. this is not to say that some or all of your posts are without merit. lol. as if you are the fucking judge. you miss one huge problem max. you dont matter. not that you arent a good guy with good things to say. you are. but in the end as far as my nuggets of wisdom go you dont matter at all. im saying that if one looks for proven fact in them it would be lacking due to the nature of the commentary. again pretty general but i honestly wont waste a lot of time thinking about it. as was the nature of the origninal discussion you are free to have whatever opinion you want and i really dont care. that is not to dismiss your opinion max i find it interesting i just honestly am not too concerned about it. i would have to add however that i am pretty comfortable with my observations of character. i do think that would be one of my strengths. good for you. however i must add that i hope its not a strong point of yours given that the comments youve recently applied to me are inaccurate to say the least. which ones do you mean cant remember any recently off the top of my head. they are also based on fact. no they are based on observation. you havent conducted in depth interviews or psychlogical testing thus conclusions on anyones personality as shown in these posts would be presumtuous at best. hell tbone could be a fairly nice guy. misguided but nice. you are splitting hairs here. the scientific method is not always the most appropriate nor the most accurate. besides i think that i have the experience to be a pretty good judge and for me that is enough. you think otherwise well.........i guess for you that is enough. tbone probably is a nice guy by the way. you probably are too in real life. so are most of the folks here i would wager. if we all met in a room we would probably find we share more opinions in common than we think. but how much fucking fun would that be you are who you are and the same with dudd. one only needs to read what you say to have a factual basis upon which to make such opinions. incorrect as any psychologist would tell you. actually not true but i did speak curtly wi
From : max dodge
and how could there be all i know of you is the nature of your posts. yet they reveal a good deal about me. if thats true and i doubt it im sorry to hear that. character does matter though max and in the final analysis may matter more than data or facts. character reveals a lot about a person. probably more than your factual rebuttal arguments. if you think you know a lot about me via my posts i imagine you also think you know all about say... tom cruise via his movies or ted kennedy via his silly rants in congress etc. id wager you think you know a lot about budd as well but i doubt youve read his writings other than here and id guess youve never talked to him via phone let alone in person. budds a fair bit different than he appears here. thus i doubt you really know that much about me either and i repeat that im fairly sure i dont know much about you. but i decline the task of finding it. oh. yeah we both figure they are out there why do we need to verify something we agree on this is not to say that some or all of your posts are without merit. lol. as if you are the fucking judge. clearly im not which is why i wrote this is not to say some or all of your posts are without merit since i am not the judge i could not say that your posts are without merit and i am stating as much. perhaps reading what i say is in order rather than making an assumption. you miss one huge problem max. i miss a lot of problems but then im not here to solve all problems. you dont matter. not that you arent a good guy with good things to say. you are. but in the end as far as my nuggets of wisdom go you dont matter at all. but see i didnt miss that part and i wouldnt call it a problem. id be worried if i somehow did matter to you. again pretty general but i honestly wont waste a lot of time thinking about it. as was the nature of the origninal discussion you are free to have whatever opinion you want and i really dont care. that is not to dismiss your opinion max i find it interesting i just honestly am not too concerned about it. you seem to think ive assumed otherwise. in fact the only thing that would indicate that you think my opinion means anything is the amount of effort youve put into saying the opposite. which ones do you mean cant remember any recently off the top of my head. lol you missed the post where you said i felt i was superior to anyone else i think it was the one just before this one. tbone probably is a nice guy by the way. you probably are too in real life. so are most of the folks here i would wager. if we all met in a room we would probably find we share more opinions in common than we think. but how much fucking fun would that be given that i do that with a group of friends on a weekly basis in my so called real life its more fun than reading derogatory remarks here. lol. if you know what i meant then why are you wasting my time arguing semantics that even you know are incorrect because how much fucking fun would that be regardless you may call it arguing sementics but they are the words you used and they conveyed something other than what you actually meant and you proved that by saying what i meant to say was... what you and tbone seem to forget is i have to take you at what you say i cannot infer any information that you do not include in your statement. to do that would to be taking you at less than face value or putting words into your mouth. uh. yes. it is. and yet you are back. to each his own. -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author on sun 07 may 2006 231429 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote there is some info on it. i will try to find it and if i can i will link it. i listened in on this debate on another ng that was heavily dominated by christian fundamentalists. it was fascinating to read. person after person came in angry about the preaching rather than the discussion. the ministers real ministers not street corner ones agreed and for the good ones a basic creed tthat they followed was tolerance with the anger and discussion with the angry people. they said time and agin that jesus and god were always open to opposing perspectives and taught compassion and patience now on a factual basis this is way beyond me-i am not a fundamentalist--maybe rather a live and let live christian as to me it is in your heart not your words in your actions not your speech and that again it wasnt christianity that was driving their congregrations away but rather it was people that changed christianity to their own ends and used it as a sword that drove new members away. again they had some good info and some data to support it ill see if i can find it but i would not considerr it the end all of data either. fundementalists tend to discourage the
From : tbone
on sun 7 may 2006 064350 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote on sat 6 may 2006 185104 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote people like me what am i greg well since you asked a christian zealot. not that theres anything wrong with that. thank you. i do try to ensure there will be sufficient evidence for a conviction if a law is passed banning christianity so you like t-bone and the guy considers me to be disturbed... yes disturbed as in not a peace or agitated. beekeep greg i am at peace. more so than any time in my life. these discussions are just one of my ministries. you hit the problem on the head with that budd. i will try to explain this to you in an honest but respectful way. i accept your interest in committing yourself to your religion. you not only have very right to do that i think that you would have everyones support to do that. what you have no right to do is to minister to this ng. we have the same right that you have. most of us have no interest in being ministered to by anyone. we get to chose our religion the same as you. if you have an interest in creating a ng to discuss your religion and to try to convert others to your views regarding your religion i would encourage you to do so. if respect is so important to you and it would appear to be since you seem to be able to find disrespect towards you at every turn here then understand that you have committed the ultimate disrespect to all the members here by coming in and acting as if your religion is the only true and accurate one and that it is the only way to salvation. you have no right to do that. it is not your religion that is getting shoved back at you. no one here would have any interest in chosing a religion for you stop trying to chose one for us. it is that hypocracy and arrogance that are getting shoved back at you. think about it. well put and respectful but sadly he will call it an attack and completely ignore what you are trying to say. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : max dodge
well put and respectful but sadly he will call it an attack and completely ignore what you are trying to say. actually being an unmoderated forum budd has a right to say anything he wants as you both have a right to ignore it. and lets face facts if you wish to spread the word about something you like find helpful or a belief you have be it a religious one or not speaking to those who have the same viewpoint isnt spreading the word. -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author on sun 7 may 2006 064350 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote on sat 6 may 2006 185104 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote people like me what am i greg well since you asked a christian zealot. not that theres anything wrong with that. thank you. i do try to ensure there will be sufficient evidence for a conviction if a law is passed banning christianity so you like t-bone and the guy considers me to be disturbed... yes disturbed as in not a peace or agitated. beekeep greg i am at peace. more so than any time in my life. these discussions are just one of my ministries. you hit the problem on the head with that budd. i will try to explain this to you in an honest but respectful way. i accept your interest in committing yourself to your religion. you not only have very right to do that i think that you would have everyones support to do that. what you have no right to do is to minister to this ng. we have the same right that you have. most of us have no interest in being ministered to by anyone. we get to chose our religion the same as you. if you have an interest in creating a ng to discuss your religion and to try to convert others to your views regarding your religion i would encourage you to do so. if respect is so important to you and it would appear to be since you seem to be able to find disrespect towards you at every turn here then understand that you have committed the ultimate disrespect to all the members here by coming in and acting as if your religion is the only true and accurate one and that it is the only way to salvation. you have no right to do that. it is not your religion that is getting shoved back at you. no one here would have any interest in chosing a religion for you stop trying to chose one for us. it is that hypocracy and arrogance that are getting shoved back at you. think about it. well put and respectful but sadly he will call it an attack and completely ignore what you are trying to say. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : beekeep
on sun 07 may 2006 203953 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote and lets face facts if you wish to spread the word about something you like find helpful or a belief you have be it a religious one or not speaking to those who have the same viewpoint isnt spreading the word. -- max yeah but the word of the day is legs. beekeep .
From : beekeep
on sun 07 may 2006 202613 gmt tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote lets keep this on topic. god drives a dodge. beekeep .
From : Annonymous
on mon 08 may 2006 025407 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote and how could there be all i know of you is the nature of your posts. yet they reveal a good deal about me. if thats true and i doubt it im sorry to hear that. nice touch but dont worry about it. character does matter though max and in the final analysis may matter more than data or facts. character reveals a lot about a person. probably more than your factual rebuttal arguments. if you think you know a lot about me via my posts i imagine you also think you know all about say... tom cruise via his movies or ted kennedy via his silly rants in congress etc. id wager you think you know a lot about budd as well but i doubt youve read his writings other than here and id guess youve never talked to him via phone let alone in person. budds a fair bit different than he appears here. thus i doubt you really know that much about me either and i repeat that im fairly sure i dont know much about you. well..........i can pretty much assure you that i havent talked to dudd on the phone or read his other writings. so we are back to the real reason that you jumped in to protect dudd does he need it max but i decline the task of finding it. oh. yeah we both figure they are out there why do we need to verify something we agree on lol. this is not to say that some or all of your posts are without merit. lol. as if you are the fucking judge. clearly im not which is why i wrote this is not to say some or all of your posts are without merit since i am not the judge i could not say that your posts are without merit and i am stating as much. perhaps reading what i say is in order rather than making an assumption. you miss one huge problem max. i miss a lot of problems but then im not here to solve all problems. thats good. you dont matter. not that you arent a good guy with good things to say. you are. but in the end as far as my nuggets of wisdom go you dont matter at all. but see i didnt miss that part and i wouldnt call it a problem. id be worried if i somehow did matter to you. again dont worry. i appreciate your concern though. again pretty general but i honestly wont waste a lot of time thinking about it. as was the nature of the origninal discussion you are free to have whatever opinion you want and i really dont care. that is not to dismiss your opinion max i find it interesting i just honestly am not too concerned about it. you seem to think ive assumed otherwise. in fact the only thing that would indicate that you think my opinion means anything is the amount of effort youve put into saying the opposite. this is an old game that you play way too often. you start a conversation and then start to emphasize that responding you shows your importance. again dont worry about my time. i have enough time to play with you for a while. and it really doesnt take that much effort to respond to you. it passes the time until the rain goes away. remember summer is here. which ones do you mean cant remember any recently off the top of my head. lol you missed the post where you said i felt i was superior to anyone else i think it was the one just before this one. and ill stand by that statement. you either think you aree or you know you arent and it bothers you enough that you enjoy coming in here and playing as if you are. fuck max im not building a reactor here that isnt too hard to figure out. tbone probably is a nice guy by the way. you probably are too in real life. so are most of the folks here i would wager. if we all met in a room we would probably find we share more opinions in common than we think. but how much fucking fun would that be given that i do that with a group of friends on a weekly basis in my so called real life its more fun than reading derogatory remarks here. then you seem to be wasting your effort here tonight. or is jumping in and protecting dudd just that important to you hey where is this meeting with friends maybe i could stop in.....have a little fun too. lol. if you know what i meant then why are you wasting my time arguing semantics that even you know are incorrect because how much fucking fun would that be regardless you may call it arguing sementics but they are the words you used and they conveyed something other than what you actually meant and you proved that by saying what i meant to say was... and yet they are only words. words or character ill spend my time on character. you go ahead and play with words. what you and tbone seem to forget is i have to take you at what you say i cannot infer any information that you do not include in your statement. to do that would to be taking you at less than face value or putting words into your mouth. words are always taken with inference. you have to or we would still be typing our original
From : max dodge
well..........i can pretty much assure you that i havent talked to dudd on the phone or read his other writings. yet you claim to know so much about him. perhaps you are the one figuring some sort of superiority over others via this amazing skill you have so we are back to the real reason that you jumped in to protect dudd does he need it max do i need a reason or is it that youve assumed i have a reason so you must confirm your skilled declarations hell i think budd can defend himself just fine but you are so predictable its fun to just push buttons. you seem to think ive assumed otherwise. in fact the only thing that would indicate that you think my opinion means anything is the amount of effort youve put into saying the opposite. this is an old game that you play way too often. you start a conversation and then start to emphasize that responding you shows your importance. um no. see i was talking about my opinion meaning something to you not my personal importance. again you need to read what i said not what you assumed i was saying. check above its pretty clear i was talking about my opinion not my personal importance. again dont worry about my time. i have enough time to play with you for a while. and it really doesnt take that much effort to respond to you. it passes the time until the rain goes away. remember summer is here. who is playing who i enter the discussion immediately capture your attention and have pretty much pulled you way the fuck off course in arguing with budd or me about who has a right to post what on the group. now were busy discussing your skills in figuring people out by soaking in posts on a ng. wow thats useful. better go cash in with the cia they have a few guys out there that they need to anylize. can you do this in email as well which ones do you mean cant remember any recently off the top of my head. lol you missed the post where you said i felt i was superior to anyone else i think it was the one just before this one. and ill stand by that statement. ok then you must remember it and know that it was fairly recent... like a few hours ago right you either think you aree or you know you arent and it bothers you enough that you enjoy coming in here and playing as if you are. fuck max im not building a reactor here that isnt too hard to figure out. unless of course you dont know what my intent was and have no idea how far off your original point you are. yeah how the fuck did you get over here and where is that reactor lol then you seem to be wasting your effort here tonight. or is jumping in and protecting dudd just that important to you hey where is this meeting with friends maybe i could stop in.....have a little fun too. nah youll suffice for a few odd moments. budd seems to have protected himself just fine. the meeting could be anywhere in town here but i doubt youd have much fun since you wouldnt be able to excersize your fine honed skills in person. and yet they are only words. words or character ill spend my time on character. you go ahead and play with words. and youll come up with conjecture and ill have conclusions. remember even in court conjecture doesnt fly what was actually said leads to conclusions. words are always taken with inference. and that is your problem. you have to or we would still be typing our original messages to include the necessary definitions and exceptions. you know that. you play on it. you put words in everyones mouth all the time. you have to writing can never equal speech. too much of our language is non verbal. we are stuck with that. it has a ying and a yang. it always leaves us opne to interpretation..........but that always leaves people like you and me the room to play around. lol it would take too much time to explain why you are wrong when i could just point at the fact that youve screwed up in reading my words twice now and admitted that you wrote something other than what you actually meant at least once. and yet max you are the one that returns again. and i trust you will return again and again as long as there is a game for you to play. ya think you see this is yet another example of your game. you make a suggestively negative comment about my being back to answer yet you yourself are engaging in that same behavior. in fact i was here in this thread before you came in on your white pony to save dudd so you really should be pointing that naughty little finger at yourself if you must point at anyone. im not pointing fingers.... im pushing buttons. and you sir have just reacted as i knew you would when having your chain yanked. still having fun if so ill have to apologize for leaving you to your spiteful reply and your hopes that ill take your bait so you can once again use your superior skills to divine my character. have fun picking on budd if thats what am
From : Annonymous
on mon 08 may 2006 062525 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote well..........i can pretty much assure you that i havent talked to dudd on the phone or read his other writings. yet you claim to know so much about him. perhaps you are the one figuring some sort of superiority over others via this amazing skill you have again that is your words not mine. you are welcome to your opinions even though they are quite off base so we are back to the real reason that you jumped in to protect dudd does he need it max do i need a reason or is it that youve assumed i have a reason so you must confirm your skilled declarations hell i think budd can defend himself just fine but you are so predictable its fun to just push buttons. yes max it is. you seem to think ive assumed otherwise. in fact the only thing that would indicate that you think my opinion means anything is the amount of effort youve put into saying the opposite. this is an old game that you play way too often. you start a conversation and then start to emphasize that responding you shows your importance. um no. see i was talking about my opinion meaning something to you not my personal importance. again you need to read what i said not what you assumed i was saying. check above its pretty clear i was talking about my opinion not my personal importance. again dont worry about my time. i have enough time to play with you for a while. and it really doesnt take that much effort to respond to you. it passes the time until the rain goes away. remember summer is here. who is playing who i enter the discussion immediately capture your attention and have pretty much pulled you way the fuck off course in arguing with budd budd hasnt posted much. i actually can play with both of you max. it isnt that difficult. it isnt brain surgery. it isnt even a car race max. it goes at the speed that we chose it to go at. there is plenty of opportunity to play with both of you. or me about who has a right to post what on the group. now were busy discussing your skills in figuring people out by soaking in posts on a ng. wow thats useful. better go cash in with the cia they have a few guys out there that they need to anylize. can you do this in email as well actually that is your passion. you are the one who seems fascinated with it. again it isnt brain surgery max. which ones do you mean cant remember any recently off the top of my head. lol you missed the post where you said i felt i was superior to anyone else i think it was the one just before this one. and ill stand by that statement. ok then you must remember it and know that it was fairly recent... like a few hours ago right you either think you aree or you know you arent and it bothers you enough that you enjoy coming in here and playing as if you are. fuck max im not building a reactor here that isnt too hard to figure out. unless of course you dont know what my intent was and have no idea how far off your original point you are. yeah how the fuck did you get over here and where is that reactor lol then you seem to be wasting your effort here tonight. or is jumping in and protecting dudd just that important to you hey where is this meeting with friends maybe i could stop in.....have a little fun too. nah youll suffice for a few odd moments. budd seems to have protected himself just fine. the meeting could be anywhere in town here but i doubt youd have much fun since you wouldnt be able to excersize your fine honed skills in person. there you go again. you jealous and yet they are only words. words or character ill spend my time on character. you go ahead and play with words. and youll come up with conjecture and ill have conclusions. remember even in court conjecture doesnt fly what was actually said leads to conclusions. you made my point. words are always taken with inference. and that is your problem. you have to or we would still be typing our original messages to include the necessary definitions and exceptions. you know that. you play on it. you put words in everyones mouth all the time. you have to writing can never equal speech. too much of our language is non verbal. we are stuck with that. it has a ying and a yang. it always leaves us opne to interpretation..........but that always leaves people like you and me the room to play around. lol it would take too much time to explain why you are wrong when i could just point at the fact that youve screwed up in reading my words twice now and admitted that you wrote something other than what you actually meant at least once. and yet max you are the one that returns again. and i trust you will return again and again as long as there is a game for you to play. ya think uh yep. you see this is yet another example of your game. you make a suggestively negative commen
From : budd cochran mrd150 preciscom spam net
max im tired of those two and their constant sniping so they are in my killfile and if they change their screen names theyll go right back in. my health is far more important than both of them together. -- budd cochran our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. it is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. john adams well put and respectful but sadly he will call it an attack and completely ignore what you are trying to say. actually being an unmoderated forum budd has a right to say anything he wants as you both have a right to ignore it. and lets face facts if you wish to spread the word about something you like find helpful or a belief you have be it a religious one or not speaking to those who have the same viewpoint isnt spreading the word. -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author on sun 7 may 2006 064350 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote on sat 6 may 2006 185104 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote people like me what am i greg well since you asked a christian zealot. not that theres anything wrong with that. thank you. i do try to ensure there will be sufficient evidence for a conviction if a law is passed banning christianity so you like t-bone and the guy considers me to be disturbed... yes disturbed as in not a peace or agitated. beekeep greg i am at peace. more so than any time in my life. these discussions are just one of my ministries. you hit the problem on the head with that budd. i will try to explain this to you in an honest but respectful way. i accept your interest in committing yourself to your religion. you not only have very right to do that i think that you would have everyones support to do that. what you have no right to do is to minister to this ng. we have the same right that you have. most of us have no interest in being ministered to by anyone. we get to chose our religion the same as you. if you have an interest in creating a ng to discuss your religion and to try to convert others to your views regarding your religion i would encourage you to do so. if respect is so important to you and it would appear to be since you seem to be able to find disrespect towards you at every turn here then understand that you have committed the ultimate disrespect to all the members here by coming in and acting as if your religion is the only true and accurate one and that it is the only way to salvation. you have no right to do that. it is not your religion that is getting shoved back at you. no one here would have any interest in chosing a religion for you stop trying to chose one for us. it is that hypocracy and arrogance that are getting shoved back at you. think about it. well put and respectful but sadly he will call it an attack and completely ignore what you are trying to say. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving *** posted via a free usenet account from http//www.tera.com *** .
From : Annonymous
on mon 08 may 2006 103858 gmt honeybs@radix.net beekeep wrote on sun 07 may 2006 203953 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote and lets face facts if you wish to spread the word about something you like find helpful or a belief you have be it a religious one or not speaking to those who have the same viewpoint isnt spreading the word. -- max yeah but the word of the day is legs. beekeep lol. .
From : Annonymous
on mon 08 may 2006 103949 gmt honeybs@radix.net beekeep wrote on sun 07 may 2006 202613 gmt tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote lets keep this on topic. god drives a dodge. beekeep i wonder how they get recall notices to him .
From : mike simmons
on sun 07 may 2006 202613 gmt tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote lets keep this on topic. god drives a dodge. beekeep ahem! beekeep actually god drives a plymouth........ dontcha remember genesis ..... ....and god drove adam and eve from the garden in a fury....... mike .
From : cavedweller
mike simmons wrote on sun 07 may 2006 202613 gmt tbone tbonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote lets keep this on topic. god drives a dodge. beekeep ahem! beekeep actually god drives a plymouth........ dontcha remember genesis ..... ....and god drove adam and eve from the garden in a fury....... mike ....and wasnt it garlits who established that on the eighth day he created the hemi .
From : Annonymous
on sun 07 may 2006 203953 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote well put and respectful but sadly he will call it an attack and completely ignore what you are trying to say. actually being an unmoderated forum budd has a right to say anything he wants as you both have a right to ignore it. and lets face facts if you wish to spread the word about something you like find helpful or a belief you have be it a religious one or not speaking to those who have the same viewpoint isnt spreading the word. true max but fanatisicm is also not effective. new born religion and new born ministering turns off many more people than it ever convinces. it is a real threat to christianity in fact. i guess you would have to decide what your goal is. if your goal is to educate people to your perspective and to try to change some of their beliefs then this type of prreaching would be counter productive. if your goal is to simply show off yourself as having moral spremecy to all other forms and thoughts of religion then this type of preaching could be effective. i guess you and budd would both fall into the category of wanting to show yourselves to be somehow superior to the rest of the world. actually as i think about it that does fit you two. also max i guess then that following your logic which was a little biased dudd has the right to say anything he wants. i not only have the right to ignore it that is really not an action but an inaction---so in your world dudd and you have the right to say what you want but in order for me to excercise my rights i have to ignore it but i have the right to shove it right back in his face. that is the option that i prefer rather than just ignoring it. oh and welcome to the fray. .
From : Annonymous
on sun 7 may 2006 151227 -0600 budd cochran mr-d150@preciscom spam.net wrote max im tired of those two and their constant sniping so they are in my killfile and if they change their screen names theyll go right back in. my health is far more important than both of them together. now that i would agree with. completely. .
From : max dodge
true max but fanatisicm is also not effective. i wasnt speaking to the effecacy of his methods merely saying that in terms of rights a term which you used he has as much right to post off topic info as you do. new born religion and new born ministering turns off many more people than it ever convinces. im not sure thats true. it depends on who the person listening is. it is a real threat to christianity in fact. id like to see the in fact part since ive been looking for such information to whack a local with. i doubt youll find anything statisitical but if you do feel free to draw my attention to it. i guess you would have to decide what your goal is. if your goal is to educate people to your perspective and to try to change some of their beliefs then this type of prreaching would be counter productive. again it depends on the listener. if your goal is to simply show off yourself as having moral spremecy to all other forms and thoughts of religion then this type of preaching could be effective. again it depends on the listener. i guess you and budd would both fall into the category of wanting to show yourselves to be somehow superior to the rest of the world. actually as i think about it that does fit you two. im not superior to anything in general. my posts otoh contain more facts that most on here. they are about the same as the core posters excepting certain individuals such as tbone who despite his disbelief in certain laws of physics and math persists in his viewpoint. snoman is another; one who lives in the 60s his info while accurate for 40 years ago needs to be scrutinized for accuracy in the present. and yourself who while thinking youve got all bases covered and looking like youve given due consideratin to all pertinent info persist in posting assumptions and personal observation of character rather than factual information about any one thing. meanwhile miles whom ive disagreed with in the past and nate whom ive had long discussions regarding certain topics and disagreed with his conclusions are both well reasoned individuals. while i have disagreed with them they at least had the courtesy to work with facts. also max i guess then that following your logic which was a little biased again one of your silly assumptions. read my post again. it should be fairly familiar to you and others who have posted the same thing in reply anyone complaining of subject matter on this group. simply put you no like the subject you no hafta read it. dudd has the right to say anything he wants. i not only have the right to ignore it that is really not an action but an inaction---so in your world dudd and you have the right to say what you want but in order for me to excercise my rights i have to ignore it but i have the right to shove it right back in his face. that is the option that i prefer rather than just ignoring it. thats fine but claiming rights or lack thereof is simply not true. the only right on here is one of free speech the rest of the limits are rules and there are damn few of them. claiming that budd has no right to post something is simply untrue. oh and welcome to the fray. yay. same day same inane crap from certain people. btw i though you abandoned ship -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author on sun 07 may 2006 203953 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote well put and respectful but sadly he will call it an attack and completely ignore what you are trying to say. actually being an unmoderated forum budd has a right to say anything he wants as you both have a right to ignore it. and lets face facts if you wish to spread the word about something you like find helpful or a belief you have be it a religious one or not speaking to those who have the same viewpoint isnt spreading the word. true max but fanatisicm is also not effective. new born religion and new born ministering turns off many more people than it ever convinces. it is a real threat to christianity in fact. i guess you would have to decide what your goal is. if your goal is to educate people to your perspective and to try to change some of their beliefs then this type of prreaching would be counter productive. if your goal is to simply show off yourself as having moral spremecy to all other forms and thoughts of religion then this type of preaching could be effective. i guess you and budd would both fall into the category of wanting to show yourselves to be somehow superior to the rest of the world. actually as i think about it that does fit you two. also max i guess then that following your logic which was a little biased dudd has the right to say anything he wants. i not only have the right to ignore it that is really not an action but an inaction---so in your world dudd and you have the