Harry Krause wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
basskisser wrote:

I'm not Kevin, Bipolar Boy!
No one gives a crap. Enough of this nonsense.

JimH apparently does, he's keeping it up! Why do you chastise me,
Harry? I'm not the one acting like a child

Yeah, you are. Over and over and over, ad nauseum.

I rest my case. You don't mind pig piling on me, when the perpetrator
is JimH. Makes me wonder why everyone here is afraid of him. He does
the same thing "over and over and over, ad nauseum" and NO ONE except
me has the balls to say anything about it. I find it amazing that you
and most here find it acceptable to lie about things that could destroy
a person, and are complete fabrications without ANY evidence of such.
That is as low as a human being can go, and whomever finds THAT
acceptable is just as bad.

basskisser wrote:

Dan Krueger wrote:

basskisser wrote:

JimH wrote:


"Don White" wrote in message
...


Here we go again.
Somebody has to teach these flyboys how to read a chart.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...nfriendly.html



Sorry to hear about that Don. I am sure the US pilots involved in this
accident feel worse than you can believe and will have a hard time
forgetting it.


You could be right, Bipolar Boy!


Insert Kevin's signature phrase here --- "Grow up".


Not quite bright enough to show some originality, huh?


Why are you responding? Are you Kevin?

basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.


If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.


Sucks to be Kevin.

basskisser wrote:

JimH wrote:

"basskisser" wrote in message
roups.com...

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.

If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.


You never answered my question from yesterday Kevin. Are you still beating
your wife and kids?


I'm not Kevin, so I don't know whether he is or not. But, if you are
talking to ME, then when you answer my question to you, then I'll
answer. The question was, you have posted the question in a form that
would make one think that you have some knowledge of me beating my wife
and kids. What IS that knowledge? You see, you aren't bright enough to
form it so as to not make you look like you have some evidence of such
ie: "still". If you were a man instead of a little jerkboy, then if you
had some shred of common decency and had knowledge of me doing such,
you'd contact the proper authorities. Or, perhaps you are projecting.
Is that why your wife is sick, from you beating her too much?


That's just sad.

basskisser wrote:

wrote:

JohnH wrote:

He obviously didn't **** off every single person here, as some still
communicate with him. Your continuing to do so is ****ing off just as many
people.

Wake up, smell the coffee, and killfile the pferde apfel.
--
******************************************
***** Hope your day is great! *****
******************************************

John

Agreed. Unlike you bk, JimH has never bothered me at all. I've had many
a pleasant conversation with him, as well as JohnH, Harry, Smithers,
Wayne B, Chuck Gould, Bert, Calif. Bill and many more.

Maybe you need to rethink your views that everybody is a fool, but you


Where did I say such a thing? You are a lot like JimH, put some idea in
your own head, and it instantly becomes fact, at least in your own
little world. So are you saying that someone that consistently tells
lies about someone else, posts nothing but insults and petty name
calling, accusing someone of beating their wife and kids is some kind
of stand up man in your eyes? JimH has done all of the above, and done
it a lot. It amazes me the amount of people here that find that
behavior acceptable.


I'm amazed that you type the crap you do and YOU find it acceptable.
Read and then click on send.

Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Dan Krueger wrote:

basskisser wrote:

JimH wrote:


"Don White" wrote in message
...


Here we go again.
Somebody has to teach these flyboys how to read a chart.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...nfriendly.html



Sorry to hear about that Don. I am sure the US pilots involved in this
accident feel worse than you can believe and will have a hard time
forgetting it.


You could be right, Bipolar Boy!


Insert Kevin's signature phrase here --- "Grow up".


Not quite bright enough to show some originality, huh?


Why are you responding? Are you Kevin?

It's quite simple. A person, using google groups can respond to any
thread, whether or not it is a direct post to them. Understand? Take
for instance if you were to post a question to JimH, aka Bipolar Boy, I
could simply reply to it, just like I am replying to this post. Again,
you just aren't great at originality, are you?

Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

JimH wrote:

"basskisser" wrote in message
roups.com...

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.

If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.


You never answered my question from yesterday Kevin. Are you still beating
your wife and kids?


I'm not Kevin, so I don't know whether he is or not. But, if you are
talking to ME, then when you answer my question to you, then I'll
answer. The question was, you have posted the question in a form that
would make one think that you have some knowledge of me beating my wife
and kids. What IS that knowledge? You see, you aren't bright enough to
form it so as to not make you look like you have some evidence of such
ie: "still". If you were a man instead of a little jerkboy, then if you
had some shred of common decency and had knowledge of me doing such,
you'd contact the proper authorities. Or, perhaps you are projecting.
Is that why your wife is sick, from you beating her too much?


That's just sad.

But you find it perfectly acceptable when JimH does the exact same
thing, only worse huh? THAT is "sad".

Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.


If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.


Sucks to be Kevin.

YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!

basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Don White wrote:


..and I wouldn't mind if Sir Chuck could at least be impartial.
He's actually worse than John these days. (ever see him say a word to
his west coast neighbours...such as Calif Bill?)
Surly someone as talented, experienced and knowledgeable and connected
as his self can understand that he loses all credibility if he's seen as
partial.


If you want to see him be partial, he's tried to chastise me for off
topic posting, etc., but says absolutely nothing to JimH when he does
the same thing! As a matter of fact, JimH can post nothing but a
slanderous, malicious post to me, and if I even DARE respond, I'll get
chastised.


Sucks to be Kevin.

YOU'RE Kevin?? The mystery is solved!


Wrong again.

His name is Dan.

basskisser wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:
basskisser wrote:

Dan Krueger wrote:

basskisser wrote:

JimH wrote:


"Don White" wrote in message
...


Here we go again.
Somebody has to teach these flyboys how to read a chart.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...nfriendly.html


Sorry to hear about that Don. I am sure the US pilots involved in this
accident feel worse than you can believe and will have a hard time
forgetting it.

You could be right, Bipolar Boy!

Insert Kevin's signature phrase here --- "Grow up".

Not quite bright enough to show some originality, huh?

Why are you responding? Are you Kevin?

It's quite simple. A person, using google groups can respond to any
thread, whether or not it is a direct post to them. Understand? Take
for instance if you were to post a question to JimH, aka Bipolar Boy, I
could simply reply to it, just like I am replying to this post. Again,
you just aren't great at originality, are you?


If you were not Kevin, then you would not respond to posts addressed to
Kevin.