comp.sys.mac.advocacy

"Steve Carroll" stated in post
trollkiller-0364DA.16290009042008@newsgroups.comcast.net on 4/9/08 3:29 PM:

> I'm aware that you never wrote what Snit lied about here, Tim. But more
> importantly, notice how this lie of Snit's is only *days* old, yet, he
> lied again (today) by saying that I'm only bringing up his old lies (as
> if they have some sort of an expiration date) when he wrote:
>
> "It is weird... he does so, I believe, because not only cannot he not
> really find any current evidence to support his claims about me but
> because he knows by bringing up past accusations he can run from the
> present."
>
> Naturally, Snit snipped out from zara's post (that Snit responded to)
> where I showed one of Snit's current trolling lies:
> Message-ID:
>
> Here is zara's full post:
> Message-ID: <_V5Lj.20748$%15.7458@bignews7.bellsouth.net>
>
> The snipping by Snit is obvious, as is his reason for doing it... to
> tell his new lie without having to gaze upon the reality of his old lie.
> It's quite obvious who is 'running from the present' here... the same
> guy that runs from every single piece of concrete proof that he is a
> lying troll... the guy that has been labeled a troll, liar or worse by
> the vast majority of people who post to this newsgroup.
>
>> Don't like me using your name or the name of your company? Stop posting your
>> lies about me. it's that simple.

If you believe I have lied, Steve, then quote it. If I have said something
that is incorrect (and not just one of your asinine nits or an example of
your inability to understand what you read) I shall surely apologize.

I would love to get the same offer from you... but you are not able to act
in such an adult way. For example, you have claimed that Tim did not write
the perverted things I have claimed he did. It is a fact, however, as shown
by the Google record, that Tim Adams did use the term "identical" to
describe incest and sex:




Incest IS sex by the very definition of the words. Therefore
they ARE identical when presented in that order.

I have spoken at some length, in the past, about the absurdity of his view
that those things being "identical" is somehow tied to their "order". That
is utter nonsense... but it is clear he called the two "identical". Also
notice how I responded:



Contrary to the claim that I try to twist words, I made it clear I was open
to him re-stating his perverted claim:

Note: If you honestly admit to your error I will remove the
correction from my .sig, if not I get to add keep it there as
another truth someone in CSMA (you) has ignorantly tried to
argue against.

It is also true that Tim Adams stated that "by definition", in his view,
"sex MUST include all of the features of incest"


-----
by definition sex MUST include all of the features of incest.
-----

Do you agree that "sex MUST include all the features of incest"?
Do you agree the two are "identical"

I do not - and can say without a moments hesitation or regret that someone
who does think in such ways is, without a doubt, a pervert... at least in
any modern Western context.

And you, Steve, will run from those questions. You will not come right out
and say you agree with Tim but you will claim I am lying when I quote him
and speak about his views in an honest way - they show him to be a perverted
person.

Again: if Tim wants to say, even at this late date, that he did not really
mean the two were identical and he did not mean that sex, for him, must
include all the features of incest I will take him at his word and not speak
of his perverse claims again. If I were trying to twist his words I would
not make that offer. Look at how Sandman has repeatedly tried to twist my
view that the incest, as a group of behaviors, is a subset of sex as a group
of behaviors. It is - nothing perverted about noting this... but Sandman
repeatedly lies and claims otherwise.

--
Picture of a tuna soda: http://snipurl.com/f351
Feel free to ask for the recipe.